Comments on: The gratuitous anti-Americanism of the New York Times http://www.dinocrat.com/archives/2006/06/24/the-gratuitous-anti-americanism-of-the-new-york-times/ Tue, 27 Jul 2010 12:24:45 +0000 hourly 1 http://wordpress.org/?v=3.0 By: spurwing plover http://www.dinocrat.com/archives/2006/06/24/the-gratuitous-anti-americanism-of-the-new-york-times/#comment-210967 spurwing plover Mon, 03 Jul 2006 14:05:08 +0000 http://www.dinocrat.com/archives/2006/06/24/the-gratuitous-anti-americanism-of-the-new-york-times/#comment-210967 The NYTs is americas most far left news papers so why should we be surprised about this? its time to boycott the NYTs and its advertisers its not worth linning a birdscage will AND I DONT WANT IT IN MY CAGE NO WAY SQUAWK,SQUARK, The NYTs is americas most far left news papers so why should we be surprised about this? its time to boycott the NYTs and its advertisers its not worth linning a birdscage will AND I DONT WANT IT IN MY CAGE NO WAY SQUAWK,SQUARK,

]]> By: bieman http://www.dinocrat.com/archives/2006/06/24/the-gratuitous-anti-americanism-of-the-new-york-times/#comment-209179 bieman Sat, 01 Jul 2006 01:24:00 +0000 http://www.dinocrat.com/archives/2006/06/24/the-gratuitous-anti-americanism-of-the-new-york-times/#comment-209179 Re "SWIFT" issue - Why should Lefty publications get all the credit? Wasn't the WSJ in on the same story? Haven't heard much (anything?) about this. Hmm. embee Re “SWIFT” issue – Why should Lefty publications get all the credit? Wasn’t the WSJ in on the same story? Haven’t heard much (anything?) about this. Hmm.

embee

]]> By: charlie Arant http://www.dinocrat.com/archives/2006/06/24/the-gratuitous-anti-americanism-of-the-new-york-times/#comment-208425 charlie Arant Fri, 30 Jun 2006 03:50:19 +0000 http://www.dinocrat.com/archives/2006/06/24/the-gratuitous-anti-americanism-of-the-new-york-times/#comment-208425 The right for the public to know some things are never worth a soldiers life. Put a muzzle on the press till our men come home, stop acting like a Jane Fonda. Stop being a medium for the terrorist groups around the world. Remember Sadden Hussein watched CNN to get his updates on the way we were fighting. Pull the plug on all information till our men come home. You call it freedom of speech I call it aiding the enemy punishable by death and I will be glad to pull the switch The right for the public to know some things are never worth a soldiers life. Put a muzzle on the press till our men come home, stop acting like a Jane Fonda. Stop being a medium for the terrorist groups around the world. Remember Sadden Hussein watched CNN to get his updates on the way we were fighting. Pull the plug on all information till our men come home. You call it freedom of speech I call it aiding the enemy punishable by death and I will be glad to pull the switch

]]> By: Right Valley http://www.dinocrat.com/archives/2006/06/24/the-gratuitous-anti-americanism-of-the-new-york-times/#comment-205361 Right Valley Sun, 25 Jun 2006 18:46:29 +0000 http://www.dinocrat.com/archives/2006/06/24/the-gratuitous-anti-americanism-of-the-new-york-times/#comment-205361 From The Right Valley: http://www.cliffordcroft.com/rightvalley/index.asp The New York Times has delighted in revealing confidential information about the methods our security services are using in the war on terror. These disclosures naturally compromise our efforts to fight terrorists by making the terrorists alert as to how we track them, making the terrorist plots harder to discover and increasing the risk that terrorist attacks against the US will be undiscovered. In other words, their disclosures potentially put lives in danger. But the Times seems to feel that the public's "right to know" outweighs all this. If the public's "right to know" is so strong, I think the public also has a "right to know" more about the New York Times. I think the government should do the following: o) Tap the phones of all columnists of the New York Times and then print the names of all their sources in their articles (if these sources actually exist). The public has a "right to know" who these anonymous sources are, to better judge the credibility of their statements. This might inhibit people from giving off-the-record information to the times, but hey, the public has a right to know. o) Print the income, net worth, and credit card and bank account numbers and balances of all editors and reporters for the New York Times. Sure, people could misuse this information, but the public's right to this information is more important. o) Publish the net worth and distributions from the Sulzberger trust fund. Again, this is private financial information, but the public has a right to know who is funding the Times and where the money is going. And besides, once this disclosure is made, we can find out how much the Sulzberger's are giving to "the poor" every year! o) Publish the political affiliations and political donations of all reporters and editors of the times, as well as political organizations they belong to. A small invasion of privacy, but that still doesn't trump our "right to know". If this information is displayed in a pictorial format, we can play "Where's Waldo" to find the single Republican! From The Right Valley:
http://www.cliffordcroft.com/rightvalley/index.asp

The New York Times has delighted in revealing confidential information about the methods our security services are using in the war on terror. These disclosures naturally compromise our efforts to fight terrorists by making the terrorists alert as to how we track them, making the terrorist plots harder to discover and increasing the risk that terrorist attacks against the US will be undiscovered. In other words, their disclosures potentially put lives in danger.

But the Times seems to feel that the public’s “right to know” outweighs all this. If the public’s “right to know” is so strong, I think the public also has a “right to know” more about the New York Times. I think the government should do the following:

o) Tap the phones of all columnists of the New York Times and then print the names of all their sources in their articles (if these sources actually exist). The public has a “right to know” who these anonymous sources are, to better judge the credibility of their statements. This might inhibit people from giving off-the-record information to the times, but hey, the public has a right to know.

o) Print the income, net worth, and credit card and bank account numbers and balances of all editors and reporters for the New York Times. Sure, people could misuse this information, but the public’s right to this information is more important.

o) Publish the net worth and distributions from the Sulzberger trust fund. Again, this is private financial information, but the public has a right to know who is funding the Times and where the money is going. And besides, once this disclosure is made, we can find out how much the Sulzberger’s are giving to “the poor” every year!

o) Publish the political affiliations and political donations of all reporters and editors of the times, as well as political organizations they belong to. A small invasion of privacy, but that still doesn’t trump our “right to know”. If this information is displayed in a pictorial format, we can play “Where’s Waldo” to find the single Republican!

]]> By: David/California http://www.dinocrat.com/archives/2006/06/24/the-gratuitous-anti-americanism-of-the-new-york-times/#comment-205026 David/California Sun, 25 Jun 2006 04:48:45 +0000 http://www.dinocrat.com/archives/2006/06/24/the-gratuitous-anti-americanism-of-the-new-york-times/#comment-205026 It is an irrefutable fact that every child in the U.S. has a greater chance of being murdered by terrorists today than they did before this story was published. Of what use is a child's 1st amendment right to free speech if their inalienable right to life is denied them? The NYT's moral preening and ethical hubris is not worth the blood of innocents! It is an irrefutable fact that every child in the U.S. has a greater chance of being murdered by terrorists today than they did before this story was published. Of what use is a child’s 1st amendment right to free speech if their inalienable right to life is denied them? The NYT’s moral preening and ethical hubris is not worth the blood of innocents!

]]> By: Flopping Aces » Blog Archive » Our Self-Absorbed Media http://www.dinocrat.com/archives/2006/06/24/the-gratuitous-anti-americanism-of-the-new-york-times/#comment-204984 Flopping Aces » Blog Archive » Our Self-Absorbed Media Sun, 25 Jun 2006 02:49:23 +0000 http://www.dinocrat.com/archives/2006/06/24/the-gratuitous-anti-americanism-of-the-new-york-times/#comment-204984 [...] Dinocrat [...] [...] Dinocrat [...]

]]>