Posted on 07/06/2008 10:25:21 AM PDT by governsleastgovernsbest
Why would the New York Times divulge information that could prove harmful to the national security of the United States? Because, so consumed is the paper by its hatred of President Bush, that the Times actually wants America to lose. Such is the considered opinion Jim Pinkerton expressed on yesterday's Fox News Watch. The case in point was an article the Times published on June 30, 2008, Amid U.S. Policy Disputes, Qaeda Grows in Pakistan, which quoted from a "highly-classified Pentagon order" describing internal disputes at the Pentagon over plans to capture Osama Bin Laden and defeat al Qaeda.
JIM PINKERTON: We endanger national security when you leak sources and methods. For example, the story that Cal [Thomas] alluded to before, about the wiretaps across the world.
JANE HALL: That's a different deal.
PINKERTON: OK. I think—just a hunch—that the New York Times hates the Bush administration so much that they want us to lose, that's what I think.
View video here.
(Excerpt) Read more at newsbusters.org ...
NY Times wants America to lose: Pinkerton ping to Today show list.
May the NY Times go belly up and out of business permanently.
Thank you for printing that message and thanks to Pinkerton who voiced his concern.
While Pinkerton is the last one I thought would take a stand for the obvious regarding the insane behavior of our media in this nation - I am pleased as he is not the bullying type and as such may carry more weight than a Limbaugh or a Hannity op-ed.
That made my day! Thank you thank you.
It’s about time this treasonous “newspaper” finally closed down.
‘The New York Times Wants America to Lose’
Does anyone have that “Captain Obvious” photo?
I propose that insofar as is possible individuals begin launching lawsuits of whatever kind against the publisher, his lackeys, the managers, stockholders, family members, employees, and newsstand vendors who carry the NYT.
Use "Death by Lawyer" to penalize them in a way that counts ~ and will serve as a warning to other "newsies" who turncoat. Think of it as a massive "stop and squat".
I agree with Pinkerton. The Times is loaded and lead by rabid
Bush haters. The ones that don’t personally agree go along to get along.
I wouldn’t be disappointed if Sulzberger had an unfortunate accident and his treasonous rag went bankrupt.
My pleasure. Pinkerton has been an outspoken critic of the MSM, by the way.
Yes, it was a good show. I haven’t watched it for a long time due to that rabid Neil guy. When I say he was a no show I stayed tuned. It was a good segment. Kudos to both Pinkerton and Cal. At last a spade is being called a spade, at least in some circles.
Well sir you made my day - and thanks again.
I see Cal Thomas got his own brand of slam in at the very end of the vidclip too!
Think I’ll celebrate with a coffee!
You can watch in peace now: Neal Gabler is off the show; his contract was not renewed.
You are kidding me? Now that is the best news I have heard in a bit. Have the shows been a good as this one?
So who is the second lefty, in addition to the reasonable Jane Hall?
He’s right.
If that traitorous garbage wrapper had known of and dared to print that an invasion of Normandy Beach was imminent during WWII,J.Edgar Hoover’s agents would have dragged those scum out in handcuffs so fast,it would have made their heads spin. That rag has been Pro-Red since Durante whitewashed Stalin’s genocide of Ukrainians. Now it seems that TREASON is covered by the First Amendment! God Help America.
As someone who writes about the liberal media, I actually miss Neal’s presence: he was surefire grist for the mill. I think the show has lost some of its edge since he left.
They are just stupid enough to think that if certain Americans lose then the rest of Americans can build the Socialist Utopian they dream of and the rest of the world will love them and wish them no harm.
Patricia Murphy is from Citizen Jane, which bills itself as a non-partisan website designed to help women educate themselves about politics. She is a former aide to Sen. Sam Nunn (D-Ga.).
Who is the traitor who leaked it to the times?
(Why would the New York Times divulge information that could prove harmful to the national security of the United States?)
Why would they not. Their agernda is not for America as founded. It is for the Socialist agenda they want to use to destroy America as founded and turn it into an extensin of the EU..
That is the real question here - find that scum sucking dog and shoot whoever it is...
I’ve said it before. One of the administration’s failures was to not handle the actions from the msm, especially the nyt, and the dems as the treason that it was.
Speak of Freudian slip - it's Obama and his fellow so-called liberals who actually wouldn't mind their country ruined provided it will hurt the government they don't like.
In the decades since, The Times has debauched into demagoguery and worse, its bias against its own country has now become so obvious to those who comment on national television to the effect that The New York Times is actually bent upon the defeat of America so that they dare declare it on television!
Such a thing would have been unimaginable when I wrote that paper. It was not my naïveté that held the New York Times up as the standard of objectivity, it really did regard itself as the newspaper of record and obligated to publish all the news that was fit to print. In the decades since, The New York Times has disclosed security secrets which compromised agents lives and very important secret programs designed to protect us against terrorist attacks.
Arguably, these disclosures were treasonous.
The paper has engaged in an affirmative action program which led to chicanery, outright lying, and plagiarism. So egregious have become the accumulated sins of the New York Times, all directly generated by its leftist obsessions, that it has become all right on television to say that you can't trust the New York Times and you can't trust it because it wants America to lose. The implication: you cannot trust the New York Times because it is treasonous.
The New York Times does not want us to lose because it hates George Bush so much. The New York Times hates George Bush so much because it wants us to lose. The New York Times wants us to lose so they can impose their hegemony on the world. They know that America stands as the last bulwark athwart their dream of One World multiculturalism.
Alas, the New York Times is only the "Congressional Record" of that movement. Their number is legion
So whats new?
Odds are that sen. rockefeller from WV is the designated leaker.
“Who is the traitor who leaked it to the times?”
My bet’s on Jay Rockefeller.
‘The New York Times Wants America to Lose’
*** Does anyone have that “Captain Obvious” photo? **
yep...
Re: # 24
PING! Those arrogant traitors could,and should be “persuaded” to give up their sources at the CIA,NSA et al. Who are they? How much were they paid? etc.,etc.
TREASON is TREASON,no matter how much the MSM tries to whitewash it! If the penalty was made to fit the crime,(in this cesspool of liberal permissivness) we can be damned certain that such actions would cease. Refusing to punish crime,is tantamount to condoning it! That gang at the Times should be sent to Gitmo,no excuses!
Semper Fi, GunnyB.
I just might tune in again.
I don't like to waste my time watching shows which repeat the liberal talking points I can see on any other news program.
Their newspaper, however, has a nice feel (literally, or is it litterly?).
I can see your point if you get paid (so to speak) watching Neil the Moron. :)
Unfortunately, I was not getting paid to watch him. I only got high blood pressure from it since there was no “healthy” release for me. Neil Gabler certainly provided you much material. Oh my! Were you watching during the Rather/Bush TANG debacle?
What have you written to date about the media? I wonder if I have read it already?
That's not a bad guess. He has a history (NSA leaks), as does Senator Durbin (D-Al Quaeda).
Oh, you must mean back in the thirties when Walter Durante was reporting how the Soviet Union was the new paradise and Stalin never killed anyone in his consolidation of power, and the reports of all the prison camps were just an antiRussian slur.. Or maybe I have a different NY Times in mind.
But we already knew that?
Ya think???
Mark
Anyway, Duranty was before my time but that is no excuse for the lapse. Somehow, I do not recall the New York Times in the early 60s being so flagrantly biased but perhaps it is just my naivety at work after all.
Thanks for asking. I write at NewsBusters and cross-post my items here. Here’s a link to my archive at NewsBusters:
http://newsbusters.org/blogs/mark-finkelstein
I don’t think hatred of Bush is the primary motivation. The NYT has been an enemy long before bush came along.
Do you remember in 2000 when MSM claimed Bush didn't have any “gravitas” to handle foreign affairs? I have not heard that with Obama. And if anyone is wet behind his ears, it's this guy. Well, I suppose a positive relationship with Ayers will qualify Obama to deal with Osama bin Laden in a thoughtful fair culturally sensitive manner. (Rolling eyes.)
OF COURSE the New York Times wants America to lose. The NY Times sees a tanking economy and lots of body bags as a perfect recipe for getting more politicians from their party elected.
When the economy tanks and people lose their jobs, homes, and savings, they become dependent on government handouts and eventually become addicted to government. And, just as drug addicts keep going back to their dealers for a fix, government addicts likewise keep going back to THEIR dealers. That would be Democrat politicians. A tanking economy means more government addicts and therefore more votes for THEM, the Democrat politicians.
The New York Times wants more body bags just because the paper loves to use casualty figures as a weapon against Republicans and because the evil military uses up money that could otherwise be used by Democrat politicans to increase the parasite class, AKA, the Democrat party “base”.
This ain’t rocket surgery....
This isn’t news. This has been a fact since November 2000 when the NY Slimes became bitter about the loss of the White House to President Bush. The NY Slimes has been driving the bitterness in the country and pushing the “polls that mean nothing” as news for years.
Jim Pinkerton simply stated what we have known for years. The NY Slimes should have been shut down for treason several times shortly after we invaded Iraq for leaking sensitive military plans. On purpose. The NY Slimes hates America and we in turn hate the NY Slimes. Don’t pay for a single product they sell (a number of papers and websites like www.about.com), don’t buy anything from their advertisers (and find a way to let the advertisers know that they should take their money elsewhere because you don’t support media outlets that hate America and you won’t support advertisers who support their cause.
Die NY Slimes Die. A quick and painful death.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.