A blog about News.
About soundoff


Member Since:
June 21, 2006
Last Signed In:
October 20, 2008
Profile Views:
3875
Blog Views:
30197
View Profile
Send a Message
Send To A Friend
Sign Guestbook
Add as a Friend

Previous Posts
Sound Off for Oct. 19, 2008
Sound Off for Oct. 12, 2008
Sound Off for Oct. 5, 2008
Sound Off for Sept. 28, 2008
Sound Off for Sept. 21, 2008
Sound Off for Sept. 14, 2008
Sound off for Sept. 7, 2008
Sound off for Aug. 31, 2008
Sound off for Aug. 24, 2008
Sound off for Aug. 17, 2008
Archives
June 06
July 06
August 06
September 06
October 06
November 06
December 06
January 07
February 07
March 07
April 07
May 07
June 07
July 07
August 07
September 07
October 07
November 07
December 07
January 08
February 08
March 08
April 08
May 08
June 08
July 08
August 08
September 08
October 08
November 08
December 08
January 09
February 09
March 09
April 09
May 09
June 09
July 09
August 09
September 09
October 09
November 09
More Archives
May 06
April 06
March 06
December 05
November 05
October 05
September 05
August 05
July 05
June 05
May 05
April 05

Blog Roll


Ask The Californian
Editorials
Entertainment
Eye of Bakersfield
Faith Forum
Fired Up!
Inside Sports
Neighbors
Right Thinking
Sound Off
Talk of the Town
Subscribe!
RSS 2.0 feed RSS 2.0
Add to My Yahoo
Add to My Google
Add to Bloglines
Add to My AOL

Share!


soundoff - > Sound Off -> Attacks on NYT were overblown
Attacks on NYT were overblown
Reader: In last Thursday's "Sound Off" column, in response to a reader's concern about some members of the media reporting sensitive information important to national security, Editor Mike Jenner, usually measured in his remarks, seemed a bit frantic in defending journalistic icons such as the New York Times.

According to Jenner, the "attacks" are "overblown" to the point of "hysteria," and are simply a matter of political posturing.

Apparently, the Bush administration wanted some of the methods it uses to track terrorist finances kept secret.

Jenner maintains the newspapers that revealed the information "consulted" with the White House before proceeding, and only then after determining that no lives would be in jeopardy, even though the likes of Democrats such as Rep. John Murtha and Sen. Harry Reid, no friends of Bush, lobbied the newspaper to keep its historically loose lips sealed.

Especially in recent years, the New York Times has been awash in controversy and saddled with credibility problems, including journalistic fraud by some reporters, and prying into the adoption records of then-U.S. Supreme Court nominee John Roberts' children.

And while quick to ask for the head of the person who revealed that Valerie Plame worked for the CIA, you can bet that no such demand will be made of those who provided the NYT with what many deem to be information critical to the national security of this nation.

-- Roy Patrick

Executive Editor Mike Jenner: Sorry if my earlier remarks seemed "frantic." But I stand by my earlier comments that the attacks on The Times concerning its bank records story were overblown. I doubt anyone would disagree that The Times has become something of a whipping boy for right-wing commentators, and you've laid out some of their "greatest hits" quite well here.
Posted in these Groups:
Topics:
posted by soundoff on Thursday, August 3, 2006 at 10:35 AM
Report a Violation
Viewed 150 times
3 comments from 3 users

1

posted by Hardliner4freedom on Aug 3, 2006 at 10:47 AM

The methods of combating terrorism through tracking finances are no secret.  I knew about them years ago.  Most everyone seriously engaged in a life of crime knows about these tactics.  Terrorism is simply a particularly despicable kind of criminal activity.

 

It's just another excuse for hateful whiners to hate and whine.

 

posted by Goat on Aug 3, 2006 at 12:25 PM

I'm so sick and tired of hearing people saying the NYT should be punished for reporting classified information.  It's not a crime for someone outside the government to disclose/talk about/report classified information.  The crime, was for the government employee to leak it to the NYT.  The government has an obligation to protect classified information, the press has an obligation to report on it.  That's how it works for crap sake!

.

I don't want to hear the Bush administration whining about anyone leaking any information until I see someone seriously punished for leaking Valerie Plames undercover identity.  Not just a pawn either...  The person who is ultimately responsible for that information getting out, no matter how high up that goes.

posted by ProgressivePete2 on Aug 3, 2006 at 01:19 PM
Sadly, the hypocrites won't do anything about the Plame leak. It's despicable for the Bush/Cheney administration to criticize the press. They've shown such a lack of respect for journalists since they were chosen by the supreme court to be co presidents. Just read the transcripts of any white house press briefing by any of the 3 stooges they sent out to the wolves. They are a pathetic excercize in not answering questions. What bothers me more is that the press enabled them for years. Nobody that is supposed to help us protect our democracy was doing their job. They would simply repeat the WH talking points, not even question their accuracy, then get go off and get drunk I suppose. I've recently wondered whether the press is more concerned with truth orĀ  truthiness.
1

  (You need to be signed in to leave a comment)

Advertisement