An Inadequate Apology from the Axis of Abuse
Vapid, ignorant, and arrogant– and perhaps a dose of desperation. That’s Bill Keller’s so-called apology appearing in the media and advertising section of the NY Times.
I thought Howell Raines and Jayson Blair would be the Gray Lady’s bottom. Keller’s response indicates the pit is yet to come, though blowing a legal and useful international intelligence operation in the midst of a global counter-terror war is low.
Keller essentially responds with smack talk. He says he wants to respond personally then:
Some of the incoming mail quotes the angry words of conservative bloggers and TV or radio pundits who say that drawing attention to the government’s anti-terror measures is unpatriotic and dangerous. (I could ask, if that’s the case, why they are drawing so much attention to the story themselves by yelling about it on the airwaves and the Internet.) Some comes from readers who have considered the story in question and wonder whether publishing such material is wise. And some comes from readers who are grateful for the information and think it is valuable to have a public debate about the lengths to which our government has gone in combatting the threat of terror.
It’s an unusual and powerful thing, this freedom that our founders gave to the press.
Yes, it’s unusual. Liberty is an extraordinary opportunity, Bill, which is why it is so precious, why its privileges must be used responsibly and with wisdom, and why it must be defended. Defense against global terrorists requires global intellgence capabilities. Yes, they must be responsive, they must be responsibly run, they must be monitored. They must also operate with a degree of secrecy–secrecy from the enemy, Bill. This program met the criteria, except now it is no longer secret.
A warped religious ideology emotionally and intellectually empowers Islamo-fascists, but money fuels their operations and their operations kill. Their operations kill people by the thousands and if they get enough money and have a little luck –or if we quit fighting them– their operations will kill millions.
As for those of us criticizing the Times foolishness acting as megaphones– I think Instapundit answered that silly crack. Editor Keller decries angry conservatives; let him wrestle with his imagined political devils.
Some of us –the majority of Keller’s critics– are American soldiers and citizens who recognize dangerous, arrogant stupidity when we read it printed on his front page.
Keller’s arrogance knows no boundary
The Administration case for holding the story had two parts, roughly speaking: first that the program is good — that it is legal, that there are safeguards against abuse of privacy, and that it has been valuable in deterring and prosecuting terrorists. And, second, that exposing this program would put its usefulness at risk.
It’s not our job to pass judgment on whether this program is legal or effective, but the story cites strong arguments from proponents that this is the case…
The Times, apparently, told the story because it could and because it thinks it can get away with it– which was one theory I discussed yesterday.
Keller claims he appreciates conscientious people who have “come to a different conclusion” regarding the Times’ exposure of the intel operation. But to be conscientious you have to have “gone through the process I’ve outlined above”– replicate his allegedly careful train of analysis and decision-making.
Bill Keller’s analytic process is a shame and a sham– he does not think America is at war. The semblance of peace in the Hamptons and in Hollywood has blinded him. He isn’t conscientious, he’s unconscious– and the Times act is unconscionable.
UPDATE: Hugh Hewitt fisks Keller’s letter. Hugh needs to get Keller on his radio program. I know, Hugh has invited him but Keller is a busy man.
I would like to volunteer to serve on the firing squad.
Comment by SCATTERSHOT — 6/26/2006 @ 6:59 am
The NY Times Responds… New York Times Editor Bill Keller responded to the tons of email and letters of anger that were sent to them over revealing National Security issues. A secondary argument against publishing the banking story was that publication would lead terrorist…
Trackback by Stop The ACLU — 6/26/2006 @ 7:11 am
NY Times Publishes Letter From Bill Keller To ‘Worriers’… Bill Keller wrote a letter to those who worried about the NY Times’ decision to publish an article about the bank data program. A collection of opinions fr……
Trackback by The Moderate Voice — 6/26/2006 @ 7:12 am
Keller reminds me of Uncle Andrew in C. S. Lewis’ The Magician’s Nephew. “Ours is a high and lonely destiny,” he says, differentiating himself from the rest of humanity. You write a great post on this, Austin, but you won’t reach Keller. He is on a much more rarified strata than you.
Comment by K T Cat — 6/26/2006 @ 7:17 am
I didn’t bother to write the NYT a letter of complaint about their leaking blabbermouths. Instead, I have decided to save it for the next terror attack on our homeland, which I assure you I will blame on them. Who wouldn’t?
Comment by Troublemaker — 6/26/2006 @ 7:49 am
It’s not our job to pass judgment on whether this program is legal or effective… So just what is your job, Mr. Keller? To publish absolutely everything you believe will make another nickel, regardless of the consequences? Precisely what kind of judgement do you exercise when considering whther or not to pubish matters of national security? Exactly what is the standard for placing our troops and nation at greater risk?
Comment by Tully — 6/26/2006 @ 8:14 am
[…] Austin Bay sums things up nicely: The Times, apparently, told the story because it could and because it thinks it can get away with it. […]
Pingback by HoodaThunk? » Blog Archive » NY Times’ Keller “explains” his treason — 6/26/2006 @ 8:18 am
Can that letter be used as evidence in court?
Comment by Harold C. Hutchison — 6/26/2006 @ 8:21 am
When - I cannot say IF anymore - there is another terrorist act on US soil, will people remember the Times and its contributions to making terrorist communications and financing safer? Or like Katrina, will it al be George bush’s fault?
Comment by Peter Porcupine — 6/26/2006 @ 8:24 am
I have mixed feelings about personalizing this story and making it about Keller rather than the underlying culture at the Times. On the one hand, yes, Keller is the gatekeeper and presumably a major voice in who and what stories get ink. But recall what happened to his predecessor: Raines became the face of the problem at the Times and when he left, it was too easy for them to pretend things had changed. They haven’t, and were Keller to go down as well, there’s little reason to think that would change anything. The Times as an institution is concerned with three things and three things only: advertising revenue, circulation figures and the financial health of their parent company. They’ve chosen an idealogical stance in their news coverage that they obviously feel corresponds to their primary market: New York upper middle class readers. Until the slow drip away of those readers reaches critical mass, the Times will continue giving its readers what they want. However, when what many of them want is to see this nation defeated in its foreign policy, the Times may find they’ve inadvertantly opened the spiggot without meaning to.
Comment by Frank — 6/26/2006 @ 8:32 am
And when terrorists next succeed in killing Americans on American soil, Keller’s NYT complaint will be that this administration failed to stop them. Duh! Could Keller maybe have used an additional analytical criterion in his decision-making process — How many lives will be lost due to the publication of this classified information? No. That would have required a moral intellect, which Keller woefully lacks.
Comment by galynn — 6/26/2006 @ 8:32 am
NYT: Because we can!… Bill Keller, executive editor of the New York Times, has published a miserable excuse of an excuse for “outing” the perfectly legal terrorist funds-tracing program that we used to catch terrorists. Many many others have fisked out Keller’s vapidly …
Trackback by Stubborn Facts — 6/26/2006 @ 8:38 am
Solid explanatory material and analysis. You should do this for a living! I’ve linked to you here: http://consul-at-arms.blogspot.com/2006/06/re-inadequate-apology-from-axis-of.html
Comment by Consul-At-Arms — 6/26/2006 @ 9:31 am
Oddly, my earlier comment was ashcanned as, shall we say, “Spiced Potted Ham.” How lovely. I’ve linked to you with the following comment: The NYT seems to have been following a progression in its leaks of intelligence operations, beginning with those having some decree of, however falsely based, controversy to the utterly unobjectionable. Their aim seems to have been to desensitize their public readership step-by-subversive-step.
Comment by Consul-At-Arms — 6/26/2006 @ 9:36 am
[…] Michael Barone wonders why do they hate us and yes, he means the NY Times. He makes a perfect simile that can be used not only to describe the Times, but much of the perpetually adolescent left: We have a press that is at war with an administration, while our country is at war against merciless enemies. The Times is acting like an adolescent kicking the shins of its parents, hoping to make them hurt while confident of remaining safe under their roof. But how safe will we remain when our protection depends on the Times? Austin Bay, in a masterpiece of understatement, calls Keller’s letter inadequate. And Andrew McCarthy notes that journalist sources are kept more confidential than our national security issues. […]
Pingback by The Anchoress » Keller is well-pummeled; you don’t need me! — 6/26/2006 @ 10:06 am
The Constitution says that Congress shall make no “abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press.” It also says that “the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed.” I have the right to own a gun, I don’t have the right to shoot someone. Keller and Pinch have the right to publish a paper, they don’t have the right to break the law doing it.
Comment by Ann — 6/26/2006 @ 10:30 am
Yep what the Times did was terrible. But what’s worse is that if the Times really IS endangering national security, that there is no way to stop them, other than ask them nicely like President Bush did. THAT is the problem more than what the Times did. If they CAN do it, don’t expect them not to. Another thing: seeing all the cool posters that were printed during World War II to stop “loose lips” etc. shows that obviously a huge PR effort went into winning that war on the home front. No similar PR effort going into winning the home-front War on Terror though. Pity.
Comment by Snowy — 6/26/2006 @ 10:42 am
Did the New York Times Cross the Line Between a Free Press and Treason?… Liberal columnist Mort Kondracke* echoed the sentiments of many Americans: The New York Times leaked information about a top secret banking operation, which was aimed at stopping terrorist financing and money transfers, because of their hatred for Pr…
Trackback by California Conservative — 6/26/2006 @ 11:05 am
[…] For a better tiger-devouring of that half-baked “apology” coming from the pen of such a small man (if he ever was one at all), go check Hugh Hewitt, Austin Bay, Professor Reynolds, and Wizbang. (I particularly love what the guys at Wizbang put together: Keller’s response, in the condensed version) […]
Pingback by Hang Right Politics - Archives » Bill Keller: A Condescending and Arrogant S.O.B. — 6/26/2006 @ 11:11 am
Peter King wants NY Times prosecuted… Here’s the story:(Peter King) To me, the real question here is the conduct of The New York Times. By disclosing this in time of war, they have compromised America’s antiterrorist policies. This is a very effective policy. They have compromised…
Trackback by Moonage Political Webdream — 6/26/2006 @ 11:24 am
Much as many of us might like to see a narrowly drawn prosecution of the New York Times for violation of the espionage laws proceed on this matter, it might be better for the Attorney General to appoint a team to conduct a full-blown investigation to identify the leakers for disclosure of classified information. When the reporters refuse to identify their sources, there is every justification to jail them. I personally have no doubt that this is open and brazen espionage on the part of the Times reporters – there is just simply no legitimate explanation for their actions — but proving all the elements would be very difficult. But the reporters will eventually be forced to break, or they will cool their heels for a while. Either way we would break that chain, that illicit flow of information that is seriously and unconscionably harming the national interest.
Comment by Steve — 6/26/2006 @ 11:47 am
[…] Courtesy of Austin Bay: […]
Pingback by NoisyRoom.net » Blog Archive » An Inadequate Apology from the Axis of Abuse — 6/26/2006 @ 12:27 pm
If I have right to know about secret programs, don’t I also have the right to know the identity of the government official who told the Times about it? I’m mean, while we’re disclosing, why do it half-assed? Why not just disclose everything? Everything Keller says about his disclosing the program would also seem to apply to the informant.
Comment by Dave H — 6/26/2006 @ 12:30 pm
Loose Lips Sink Ships… Milipundit, a former enlisted sailor who now works for Representative Jack Kingston, laments that the NYT and other media outlets continually divulge secret operation, snarking, “Who needs a security clearance when you’ve got the Times?” …
Trackback by Outside The Beltway | OTB — 6/26/2006 @ 12:58 pm
[…] Austin Bay Blog: An Inadequate Apology from the Axis of Abuse […]
Pingback by UrbanGrounds » Blog Archive » The Old Grey Lady Ain’t What She Used to Be — 6/26/2006 @ 1:39 pm
[…] UPDATE: Austin Bay comments: “The Times, apparently, told the story because it could and because it thinks it can get away with it.” […]
Pingback by The Heretik » Blog Archive » Instapundiocy TM — 6/26/2006 @ 2:38 pm
Treason by the New York Times… Glenn Reynolds asserts that Bill Keller, the news editor of the New York Times, is either not very bright or Keller thinks that you (I think Glenn means Keller’s critics) are not very bright. Glenn’s assertion responds to an open…
Trackback by Right on the Left Beach — 6/26/2006 @ 3:10 pm
“The Times, apparently, told the story because it could and because it thinks it can get away with it…” Isn’t that the same reason Bill Clinton gave for doing Monica - - he did it because he could? Joe G
Comment by Joseph Gaston — 6/26/2006 @ 3:47 pm
[…] Sister Toldjah Expose the Left Stop The ACLU Freedom for Some Austin Bay California Conservative Patterico’s Pontifications HoodaThunk? […]
Pingback by Prosecuting the NY Times at 4thelittleguy.com — 6/26/2006 @ 6:12 pm
Um. The President has alreadly told everyone about these programs in various speeches. The SWIFT matter is of public record on the UN website.
Comment by Jay — 6/27/2006 @ 6:05 pm
[…] The WSJ jumps on Bill Keller’s June 25th open letter discussing his decision to blow the intel operation.  I agree– that lettery revealed much about his paper’s institutional biases and his own blindness.  […]
Pingback by Austin Bay Blog » an ideological wingman — 6/30/2006 @ 10:52 am