Did The NY Times Tip Off Terrorists?

red states rule

Senior Member
May 30, 2006
16,011
573
48
If this is ever proven in Court, the NY Times is in big trouble.

The liberal media has been undermining the War on Terror since it started, but this is treason.

http://michellemalkin.com/archives/005456.htm

THE TERRORIST-TIPPING TIMES
By Michelle Malkin · June 28, 2006 12:12 PM
My syndicated column today (now on Yahoo! News) offers a reminder that the blabbermouths at the New York Times have been implicated in terror tip-offs about our financial investigations before:

I remind you of the case of the Treason Times, the Holy Land Foundation, and the Global Relief Foundation. As the New York Post reported last September, the Justice Department charged that "a veteran New York Times foreign correspondent warned an alleged terror-funding Islamic charity that the FBI was about to raid its office -- potentially endangering the lives of federal agents." Times reporter Philip Shenon was accused of blowing the cover on a Dec. 14, 2001, raid of the Global Relief Foundation.

"It has been conclusively established that Global Relief Foundation learned of the search from reporter Philip Shenon of The New York Times," U.S. attorney Patrick Fitzgerald wrote in an Aug. 7, 2002, letter to the Times' legal department.

Shenon's phone tip to the Muslim charity (which occurred one day before the FBI searched the foundation's offices), Fitzgerald said, "seriously compromised the integrity of the investigation and potentially endangered the safety of federal law-enforcement personnel." The Global Relief Foundation (GRF) wasn't some beneficent neighborhood charity sending shoes and Muslim Barbie dolls to poor kids overseas. It was designated a terror-financing organization in October 2002 by the Treasury Department, which reported that GRF "has connections to, has provided support for, and has provided assistance to Usama Bin Ladin, the al Qaida Network, and other known terrorist groups."

The Muslim charity had "received funding from individuals associated with al Qaida. GRF officials have had extensive contacts with a close associate of Usama Bin Ladin, who has been convicted in a U.S. court for his role in the 1998 bombings of the U.S. embassies in Kenya and Tanzania." Moreover, the Treasury Department said, "GRF members have dealt with officials of the Taliban, while the Taliban was subject to international sanctions."

Shenon's then-colleague, Judith Miller, had placed a similar call to another Muslim terrorist-front financier, the Holy Land Foundation, a few weeks before Shenon's call to the GRF. She was supposedly asking for "comment" on an impending freeze of their assets. According to Fitzgerald in court papers, Miller allegedly also warned them that "government action was imminent." The FBI raided the Holy Land Foundation's offices the day after Miller's article was published in the Times.

The Times' reporters -- surprise, surprise -- refuse to cooperate with investigators trying to identify the leakers. The government is appealing a ruling protecting the loose-lipped reporters' phone records.

Which side are they on? Actions speak louder than words.

***

GOP Senators speak out on the dangers of classifed leaks. A House GOP resolution is in the works. Howard Kurtz plays the violin for the NYTimes/LATimes. Hugh Hewitt's not having it.

I'm hearing buzz about a protest in front of the NYTimes soon. Stay tuned.
 
NYT=freedom of the press/freedom of speech

The actual leak=treason

Reason NYT is attacked=b/c the leak came from the current admin, and that might lower his poll ratings.

CharlestonChad=still doesn't think it was responsible of the NYT and Wall Street Journal to release the story, but they cannot be legally held accountable.
 
Abbey Normal said:
The New York Times "All the US Gov't secrets that are not fit to print"

Publisher: Benedict Arnold

Executive Editor: Alger hiss

Copy Editor: Jayson Blair

Cmon Miss Abigail--they are protecting our rights. Like the ACLU ! We would be slaves without em !
:poke:
 
dilloduck said:
Cmon Miss Abigail--they are protecting our rights. Like the ACLU ! We would be slaves without em !
:poke:

Oh, lord, save me from libs trying to "protect" me from anything. :duh3:

My theory is that they are endlessly trying to find a story to match the magnitude of Watergate. Just think of it: newsmen seen as heroic studs, saving the country from evil Republicans. We should only be surprised that they haven't sunk even lower in that pursuit. But then, Dan Rather did a nice job of that for everyone.
 
Did the NYT tip off terrorists? Does a wild bear shit in the woods? Is the Pope Catholic? Is the left so desperate to regain power that it would do so over the broken, bleeding bodies of American citizens and soldiers - without as much as a backward glance? For the answers to these and many other questions, tune in next time for the thrilling conclusion of the Pinch Sulzberger production, "Fuck You, America".
 
CharlestonChad said:
NYT=freedom of the press/freedom of speech

The actual leak=treason

Reason NYT is attacked=b/c the leak came from the current admin, and that might lower his poll ratings.

CharlestonChad=still doesn't think it was responsible of the NYT and Wall Street Journal to release the story, but they cannot be legally held accountable.


Libs love the NY Times and so do terrorists

The NY Times is losing readers, so they will now offer group discounts to terrorist training camps

After all, if terrorists want to know what the US government is doing to find them, they want to read the NY Times
 
Why are you blaming the NYT????? How about the people in the government who leaked the information to them? How stupid can you be? I seriously doubt that these organizations didn't know they were being investigated. Also, it is highly questionable as to whether these organizations were "terrorist" or even supported terrorism.

Michelle Malkin is hardly a credible source of information, she's a right-wing venom spewer of the worst kind.

acludem
 
red states rule said:
Libs love the NY Times and so do terrorists

The NY Times is losing readers, so they will now offer group discounts to terrorist training camps

After all, if terrorists want to know what the US government is doing to find them, they want to read the NY Times

That's funny, b/c I guess by your logic, conservatives also love terrorist, since the Wall Street Journal also printed the same story the same time that the NYT printed it. Even your golden boy, Bill O'Reilly, expressed his anger towards the WSJ.
 
Do you guys (Conservatives) believe FOX News is going to cost America lives when they aired a story about how easy it would be to build a dirty bomb, by showing the viewers exactly how to build that bomb and where to detinate it?
 
CharlestonChad said:
Do you guys (Conservatives) believe FOX News is going to cost America lives when they aired a story about how easy it would be to build a dirty bomb, by showing the viewers exactly how to build that bomb and where to detinate it?

Ya--I wish they would stop that crap.
 
CharlestonChad said:
That's funny, b/c I guess by your logic, conservatives also love terrorist, since the Wall Street Journal also printed the same story the same time that the NYT printed it. Even your golden boy, Bill O'Reilly, expressed his anger towards the WSJ.


Libs are missing the point. A NY Times reporter CALLED the charity and told them they were going to be searched:

Shenon's phone tip to the Muslim charity (which occurred one day before the FBI searched the foundation's offices), Fitzgerald said, "seriously compromised the integrity of the investigation and potentially endangered the safety of federal law-enforcement personnel." The Global Relief Foundation (GRF) wasn't some beneficent neighborhood charity sending shoes and Muslim Barbie dolls to poor kids overseas. It was designated a terror-financing organization in October 2002 by the Treasury Department, which reported that GRF "has connections to, has provided support for, and has provided assistance to Usama Bin Ladin, the al Qaida Network, and other known terrorist groups."

This is not Ms Malkin saying this - it is Fitzgerald
 
CharlestonChad said:
NYT=freedom of the press/freedom of speech

The actual leak=treason

The Rosenbergs were tried, convicted, and executed for treason, after they forwarded secret information from the U.S.'s atomic-bomb program to the Soviet Union, thus "giving" the Soviets the Bomb.

Suppose that, instead of forwarding the vital info directly to their Soviet agent contact, the Rosenbergs had offered it to the New York Times. The NYT editors look at it, realize what it is, and what impact it could have if the Soviets get it. U.S. govt people go to them and beg them not to publish it. They mull it over, and decide to publish it anyway. The Soviets read the report, and start building bombs that work.

Did the New York Times commit treason? I say they did. Even though they did nothing more than what they did in these current financial-data and international-wiretap cases.
 
Little-Acorn said:
The Rosenbergs were tried, convicted, and executed for treason, after they forwarded secret information from the U.S.'s atomic-bomb program to the Soviet Union, thus "giving" the Soviets the Bomb.

Suppose that, instead of forwarding the vital info directly to their Soviet agent contact, the Rosenbergs had offered it to the New York Times. The NYT editors look at it, realize what it is, and what impact it could have if the Soviets get it. U.S. govt people go to them and beg them not to publish it. They mull it over, and decide to publish it anyway. The Soviets read the report, and start building bombs that work.

Did the New York Times commit treason? I say they did. Even though they did nothing more than what they did in these current financial-data and international-wiretap cases.

rough, but very good.
 
CharlestonChad said:
NYT=freedom of the press/freedom of speech So in your world view freedom of press/speech doesn't come with responsibilities as well? Curious indeed that you would allow an inanimate corporations rights to trump the average Americans rights to life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness.

The actual leak=treason AGREED, w/the NYT as collaborators or accessories or whatever the legal term is for "them too".

Reason NYT is attacked=b/c the leak came from the current admin, and that might lower his poll ratings. LOL. Good One! No really, why do you think that publishing classified information and potentially tipping off terrorists would be attacked?

CharlestonChad=still doesn't think it was responsible of the NYT and Wall Street Journal to release the story, but they cannot be legally held accountable. True and mistaken. They are irresponsible and can/should be accountable. They should have sat on the story and used it as leverage to garner an non-classified exclusive. After disclosing the traitor of course. Perhaps the exclusive could have been them covering his/her trial.


acludem said:
Why are you blaming the NYT????? How about the people in the government who leaked the information to them? How stupid can you be? I seriously doubt that these organizations didn't know they were being investigated. Also, it is highly questionable as to whether these organizations were "terrorist" or even supported terrorism. I don't know about anyone else, but I blame both of them.

Michelle Malkin is hardly a credible source of information, she's a right-wing venom spewer of the worst kind. Wow, three assertions in nineteen words. Good Job. Anyway: Credible is based on truth and facts not attitude. Are you able to prove she is "hardly a credible source of information" or that "she's a right-wing venom spewer" or that she is "of the worst kind"?

acludem

Y'all have fun now. Y'hear?
 

Forum List

Back
Top