 |
|
Add to My Group
|
June 24, 2008 at 00:04:09
Promoted to Headline (H2) on 6/24/08: by Michael Collins Page 1 of 4 page(s) |
|
 
|
From the People Who Brought Us [[duo]] The New York Times "Covers" the Susan Lindauer Hearing Michael Collins
Judith Miller & George Bush
Former New York New York Times reporter, Judith Miller, who wrongly
claimed Iraq had weapons of mass destruction (WMD) and her president.
(Images left, right)
"Scoop" Independent News
Washington, DC
The New York Times disgraced itself and betrayed the citizens of the United States when it repeatedly headlined misleading stories by reporter Judith Miller that Iraq had weapons of mass destruction (WMD). The paper issued a meandering apology well after the 2003 invasion prompted by the inaccurate reporting of Miller, the self-styled "Miss Run Amok" reporter, and others. But it was too little and too late to correct the damage. And it seems the Times is still running amok at the expense of what's in the public interest.
One has to wonder if the New York Times and the White House coordinated efforts on the WMD matter. They certainly worked very well together, propping up in tandem the fear-based prophecy of a menacing Saddam who would deliver his nuclear filled hate to our shores. This was total nonsense, to put it kindly.
We know that the Bush administration and the New York Times editor, William Keller, communicated about a very sensitive matter before the 2004 election. New York Times reporters James Risen and Eric Lichtblau had discovered that the Bush administration had been illegally wiretapping citizens since Sept. 11, 2001. "Internal discussions about drafts of the article had been 'dragging on for weeks' before the Nov. 2 election, Mr. Keller acknowledged," according to an article by Times public editor Byron Calme Instead of publishing the story, Times editor Keller killed and barred the story from public release until December 16, 2006, 13 months after the 2004 election.
Was this a coincidence? Not at all. Bush requested the story be killed for "national security" reasons. Forgetting the paper's shining moment when it released the Pentagon Papers, Keller willingly complied.
This was the election that would determine if Mr. Bush would have another four years to work the magic that's brought the nation to its current state of peril. When the story finally broke, it created a wave of negative reaction across the political spectrum.
Thanks to the New York Times' deliberate delay, we'll never know how the public would have responded just weeks before the 2004 vote. Based on the public response when the story was released, it may well have created enough of a shift to render the dirty tricks of Ohio and elsewhere meaningless.
The false WMD reports represented propaganda of the most frightening type. It came from reporter Miller who had relied largely on one source, Ahmad Chalabi. He was on the Defense Department payroll at the time that reporter Miller gained the WMD information from him. Without any doubt, the New York Times was a major enabler of the Iraq invasion and occupation.
By withholding a most devastating indictment of the lawless regime in power, namely illegal wiretapping of U.S. citizens, the New York Times denied citizens the option of a fully informed choice in 2004 and it played a major role in returning Bush-Cheney to power.
Four thousand U.S. deaths, tens of thousands of life long injuries to U.S. troops, 1.2 million dead Iraqis due to civil strife triggered by the war, 5 million Iraqi orphans, and the loss of United States' prestige on a massive scale: this is the shared legacy of the New York Times coverage leading up to the Iraq invasion. A nation on the verge of bankruptcy, foreclosures at epidemic rates, national debt so out of control it is difficult to even measure and a deep recession with possibly worse down the road: this is just a part of the legacy of the New York Times' coverage of the 2004 election.
How low will they sink?
Even on a smaller scale, their depths are without limits, it would seem.
The most recent example is the New York Times' coverage of the competency hearing on June 17, 2008 in the Susan Lindauer versus the United States in the Federal District Court, Southern District of New York, in lower Manhattan. Antiwar Activist Returns to Court for Iraq Spy Case, Alan Feuer, New York Times, June 18, 2008.
The views expressed in this article are the sole responsibility of the author
and do not necessarily reflect those of this website or its editors.
 Contact Author |
Contact Editor |
 View Authors' Articles |
|
|
|
|
| 11 comments |
|
Here is my comment regarding the Times...
from another article appearing below. Has Rupert Murdoch purchased the Times? First the hire of PNAC's Bill Kristol and the consequent retraction interval timed with a stopwatch, now we see this tripe masquerading as some sort of expose. What is wrong with advisors with an interest in ethanol? Doesn't it comport with the Times' preference for a Big Oil agenda? It seems to me that most proposals advanced by a candidate or their staff in developing alternatives to petroleum should be applauded. I'm sure the Times has done so with John McCain's ridiculous proposal to offer a third of a billion dollar X prize for new battery technology. It seems that the Old Grey Lady is well advanced into her dotage. With a demonstrated inability to advance into the future without lurching to the right, perhaps she will soon become the New Grey Ghost. by John Sanchez Jr. (9 articles, 0 quicklinks, 25 diaries, 1791 comments [148 recommended, 3 rejected]) on Tuesday, Jun 24, 2008 at 2:09:06 AM  (0+)
|
|
Reply: They're endorsing their own agenda
Which is the dance of supplication to those in power. What else explains Keller's "fix" for Bush by withholding the 2004 domestic spying on citizens story? Nothing and they have no excuse for their coverage of energy. As you say, they may be in business but they're quickly becoming a ghost, aside from occasional outbreaks of ratoinality, quickly withdrawn. by Michael Collins (130 articles, 20 quicklinks, 7 diaries, 484 comments [42 recommended, 0 rejected]) on Tuesday, Jun 24, 2008 at 2:40:44 PM (0+)
|
|
Thanks for holding them accountable
Someone at the Times should have had the brains to kill THIS story, not the one in October 2004 that could have salvaged so much. It's really quite remarkable that the NYT has learned nothing and carries apparently no remorse from the Miller-Chalabi fiasco and continues to smear its own reputation. by Kathlyn Stone (46 articles, 227 quicklinks, 27 diaries, 690 comments [1 recommended, 0 rejected]) on Tuesday, Jun 24, 2008 at 10:01:57 AM (0+)
|
|
Reply: You'd think that they'd talk to Lindauer
But then again, you'd think they'd check out Millers source. Amazing & thank you!!!!!!!!!!!!! by Michael Collins (130 articles, 20 quicklinks, 7 diaries, 484 comments [42 recommended, 0 rejected]) on Wednesday, Jun 25, 2008 at 1:35:31 PM (0+)
|
|
What is the "New York Times" up to?
Michael Collins wonders why the NYT provides such biased coverage of the competence hearing of Susan Lindauer. The answer is simple. Like all other major media in the United States, the NYT is intimately wired into the USG intelligence community (USGIC) that serves it and that it in turn must protect. Lindauer's central claim is that she functioned as a USGIC asset -- surely for the faction of that community that opposed the Iraq war and that was not happy in 2000 about their plans to stage 911. The interests of the intelligence community, and the ruling class that staged 911 lies in her silence, to which end Mukasey (presumably) honored the claim that she was not competent to stand trial but declined to force her to take anti-psychotic drugs. (The purpose of administering such drugs would be to damage her irremediably, not help her.) The likely truth of the matter is that she is perfectly sane and is telling the truth. She did, after all, predict 911 in some specificity and she is also stating that she was impersonated by another at the lunch meeting with Iraqis where the other "Susan Lindauer" accepted gratuities -- such a hamburger!! -- for doing their bidding. She mocks the legal contrivance that the hamburger -- which she never ate -- is worth years in prison even if she had eaten it. by Michael Green (9 articles, 0 quicklinks, 3 diaries, 10 comments [5 recommended, 0 rejected]) on Tuesday, Jun 24, 2008 at 3:08:03 PM (0+)
|
|
Reply: What Is American Becoming?
I seem to remember that during the cold war era the soviets put a lot of dissidents they wanted to discredit in insane asylums and also drugged them. Their propaganda machine then disseminated the story to the masses to convince them that anyone who opposed the regime was crazy and delusional. If the people were ever released their brains were so burned out they were incapable of uttering a coherant statement. Food for thought.... by macdon1 (0 articles, 0 quicklinks, 0 diaries, 113 comments [4 recommended, 0 rejected]) on Tuesday, Jun 24, 2008 at 4:06:41 PM (0+)
|
|
Reply: Thanks so much
I continue to be impressed with the quality of comment on this and other articles on this story. Your points are strong and worthy of careful consideration. The contradictions here are astounding. She's "delusional" about her role as a U.S. asset and activities but she's guilty of engaging in those activities and knowinly serving as an unregistered agent (not 'spy'). When did she become delusional? Before the activities, in which case, she's innocent by the governments allegation of delusions. If after arrest, how does that happen? Delusions caused by federal incarceration? She engaged in the activities charged illegally but wrote about them in the 10 letters to Card? Why would she outline them to the White House chief of staff if she were a foreign agent. Innocent until proven guilty. She wants a trial. Not unreasonable in this country, is it? by Michael Collins (130 articles, 20 quicklinks, 7 diaries, 484 comments [42 recommended, 0 rejected]) on Wednesday, Jun 25, 2008 at 1:41:18 PM (0+)
|
|
And the domestic spying began at least 7 months pre 9-11
In NSA Domestic Surveillance Began 7 Months Before 9/11, Convicted Qwest CEO Claims Ryan Singel writes on October 11, 2007: Did the NSA's massive call records database program pre-date the terrorist attacks of 9/11?That startling allegation is in court documents released this week which show that former Qwest CEO Joseph Nacchio -- the head of the only company known to have turned down the NSA's requests for Americans' phone records -- tried, unsuccessfully, to argue just that in his defense against insider trading charges. Nacchio was sentenced to 6 years in prison in 2007 after being found guilty of illegally selling shares based on insider information that the company's fortunes were declining. Nacchio unsuccessfully attempted to defend himself by arguing that he actually expected Qwest's 2001 earnings to be higher because of secret NSA contracts, which, he contends, were denied by the NSA after he declined in a February 27, 2001 meeting to give the NSA customer calling records, court documents released this week show. by Rady Ananda (182 articles, 374 quicklinks, 49 diaries, 1718 comments [201 recommended, 2 rejected]) on Tuesday, Jun 24, 2008 at 5:08:17 PM (0+)
|
|
Reply: Rady, you are SO on target
Here's the one guy who stood tall and said NO WAY. Guess what, he got screwed and the others are getting immunity. This is great stuff. Thanks for appending it. Position and wealth are no protection if you go afoul of the PTB. by Michael Collins (130 articles, 20 quicklinks, 7 diaries, 484 comments [42 recommended, 0 rejected]) on Wednesday, Jun 25, 2008 at 1:42:52 PM (0+)
|
|
great coverage, michael!
this may give pause to all those hold-outs who still think the NYT is the last bation of quality and progressivism. bah, humbug! thanks for doing what they obviously refuse to do - actually cover (vs. spin) the story. by Joan Brunwasser (206 articles, 3757 quicklinks, 3 diaries, 751 comments [4 recommended, 0 rejected]) on Tuesday, Jun 24, 2008 at 6:31:17 PM (0+)
|
|
Reply: I did another thing that the NYT didn't do
I talked to the defendant. What a concept. Thanks and great stuff on Richard Hayes Phillips. by Michael Collins (130 articles, 20 quicklinks, 7 diaries, 484 comments [42 recommended, 0 rejected]) on Wednesday, Jun 25, 2008 at 1:44:35 PM (0+)
|
Want to post your own comment on this Article? 
|
||||
|
||||||||||||||
Must Read (0) 
Well Said (0) 
News (0) 
Touching (0) 
Funny (0) 
Supported (0) 
Interesting (0) 
Inspiring (0) 
Valuable (0)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Tell a Friend:
|
Copyright © 2002-2009, OpEdNews |
