THE DAILY BLADE: What Part Of “Loose Lips Sink Ships” Doesn’t The New York Times Understand?: Part II
So how did The New York Times commemorate the seventh anniversary of the terror attacks that killed more than 3,000 Americans? The paper broke a story divulging classified Bush Administration orders green-lighting covert cross-border raids against the Taliban and Al Qaeda inside Pakistan from Afghanistan by American Special Operations forces. Now, Pakistan’s military leaders – who have oft stated that such incursions would not be tolerated and its army would defend the country’s sovereignty “at all costs” – have been alerted to our plans, further imperiling troops executing terrorist-hunting missions inside remote Pakistani tribal regions.
It’s not the first time the paper has sought to undermine military operations and national security, nor the second time - and it certainly won’t be the last. But make no mistake about it: The Times could not publish these stories if it did not have partners in crime within the Bush administration willing to speak to the paper “off the record” or “on background.” Why aren’t these weasels brave enough to divulge their identities when they leak classified information? Because they know that the parents and spouses of loved ones on the front lines in Afghanistan and Iraq would punch them in the nose.
Apparently without realizing the unmitigated gall of it, on September 11 The Times also published two op-eds - “All Too Quiet on the Homeland Front” by former Department of Homeland Security inspector general Clark Kent Ervin and “Questions of Security” by Columbia University law professor Philip Bobbitt and former Sen. John Danforth (R-MO) - which pose questions about national security and the war on terror to presidential candidates John McCain and Barack Obama.
Unfortunately, the authors of these commentaries did not think to ask the most important questions of all:
† What specific steps will you take to prevent leaks of classified information to The New York Times and other media outlets?
† What consequences will the first person inside your administration who leaks information to the press be subject to, so as to deter the next leaker?
† When a news outlet publishes classified military secrets, will you be willing to limit free access to administration military, diplomatic and domestic security officials by reporters from the offending organization for the duration of the Iraq war and/or other active military operations?
The Stiletto is a staunch free-speech proponent but as Abraham Lincoln sagely observed, the U.S. Constitution is not a suicide pact.
Obama’s Family Values: Part IV
More bad news on the Kenyan home front for Barack Obama’s impoverished family. Thieves broke into the home of his 86-year-old grandmother, Sarah Hussein Obama, in an unsuccessful attempt to steal the solar panel from her tin roof, reports BBC News.
In a supremely ironic twist of fate, she told the East African Standard paper that she now fears for her safety: "These are just people from around who think that Obama has been sending me a lot of money.”
But Obama has not sent any money, material goods, food or medicine to her, or to his half-brother, George, who lives on less than a dollar a month in a hut without indoor plumbing, and his Kenyan kinfolk should broadcast that sad fact far and wide for their own personal safety.
Editorial Note: To read the previous posts in the “Obama’s Family Values” series, click here (last item), here and here (last item).
Comments