'NYT' Veterans Frankel and Jones Defend Paper's Banking Story

[Stephanie]

Now their rolling out old Former workers to try to defend them..Still the same smug


By Joe Strupp

Published: June 28, 2006 11:45 AM ET

NEW YORK Two prominent former newsman for The New York Times, Max Frankel and Alex Jones, came out in defense of their old employer's recent disclosure of a secret bank monitoring program, saying the continued attacks on the paper are unfair and misplaced.

Frankel, who served as executive editor from 1986 to 1994 and held other posts in Washington and Moscow, called the recent criticism an "outburst of Agnetism," while Jones, a onetime press reporter for the paper and current director of the Shorenstein Center at Harvard University, said this was "an important moment for the watchdog press in wartime."

Both men commented to E&P about last week's disclosure by the Times of a secret government program that has been monitoring bank transactions since just after 9/11. The Times, which reported the information at about the same time as the Los Angeles Times and The Wall Street Journal, has since taken the brunt of attacks, from President Bush, Vice President Cheney, and members of Congress.

Today, Congress is set to consider a resolution condemning the newspaper.

Frankel, who served as Washington bureau chief during Richard Nixon's first term, compared the attacks to then-Vice President Spiro Agnew's anti-press rants of the early 70s. He said going after the Times is part of an overall defensive mode the Bush administration and Republicans are currently stuck in because of problems that include the Iraq War.

"It is part of the stop-the-flag-burning [approach], the whole 'schmear'," Frankel said during a phone interview this morning. "They have dug themselves a deep trench, so they are all getting together to push all of the buttons. They know how to castigate the liberals and bring out their supporters." He added that "anytime the one, two, and three ranking officials of the government all come out talking off the same piece of paper, my propaganda antennae go up."

Frankel also pointed to several recent reports indicating that the bank monitoring program had been previously disclosed and that the information the Times reported was not all that secret. "The fact that they are chasing the money is not new," Frankel said of the anti-terrorist methods being used by the federal government. "For the last couple of years, the administration has been boasting about how they have cut off the money. I find it hard to believe that this information is of much use to the terrorists."

Jones, a Pulitzer Prize winner and co-author of the 2000 Times history, "The Trust," said those attacking the paper should be looking at the administration's recent pattern of secrecy, citing as an example the domestic wiretapping story the Times broke late last year. "This administration has demonstrated a pattern of secrecy that has been extreme," he told E&P. "They were, in my opinion, entirely wrong regarding whether the press needed to know about the domestic eavesdropping without warrants."

While Jones acknowledged that the Times, in Keller's own words, made a close-call on the bank records story, he said the overriding factor needs to be erring on the side of disclosure rather than government secrecy. "I believe that the New York Times made its decision very carefully and not in a knee-jerk way," he said, citing the weeks of discussion that went on between the Times and federal officials. "The Times is a big boy and has to be responsible for its actions, but this should not distract from the larger point of the need for Americans to know more, not less."

When asked what impact the current anti-press attacks against the Times will have on the paper, or journalism in general, the men offered different views.

Frankel said there is a danger that the public can become convinced that such moves by newspapers are based on efforts to oppose national interest rather than report the truth. But he believed that this incident would not have a long-term negative impact. "The people who think the New York Times is the enemy will continue to think so and those who believe this is the function of the press, even in wartime, will laugh it off."
Jones, commenting on the attacks by public officials, said "part of it is sincere and part of it is politics." But he added that the overwhelming issue to keep in mind is that "the public is far better served by more information than by more secrecy."
Keep up the work, they are feeling the heat if their digging up their past employees to speak in their favor... CANCEL, PHONE, WRITE.. They want to think us out in middle America are just a bunch of loony hicks, that don't know how we're feeling about this........Screw them where it hurts, in their wallets
http://www.editorandpublisher.com/eandp/news/article_display.jsp?vnu_content_id=1002763515

 

[musicman]

"It is part of the stop-the-flag-burning [approach], the whole 'schmear'," Frankel said during a phone interview this morning. "They have dug themselves a deep trench, so they are all getting together to push all of the buttons. They know how to castigate the liberals and bring out their supporters."

Frankel almost - ALMOST, mind you - conceals his contempt for conservative America here. But, he can't quite mask the stench of his true, "Bush is playing these bumpkins like a Stradivarius" feelings.

He added that "anytime the one, two, and three ranking officials of the government all come out talking off the same piece of paper, my propaganda antennae go up."

Bullshit. The news that the NYT has set itself up as the arbiter of U.S. national security scarcely needs to be read off a piece of paper.

Frankel also pointed to several recent reports indicating that the bank monitoring program had been previously disclosed and that the information the Times reported was not all that secret. "The fact that they are chasing the money is not new," Frankel said of the anti-terrorist methods being used by the federal government. "For the last couple of years, the administration has been boasting about how they have cut off the money. I find it hard to believe that this information is of much use to the terrorists."

I'll just let Treasury Secretary Snow field this one:

"You have defended your decision to compromise this program by asserting that "terror financiers know" our methods for tracking their funds and have already moved to other methods to send money. The fact that your editors believe themselves to be qualified to assess how terrorists are moving money betrays a breathtaking arrogance and a deep misunderstanding of this program and how it works...".

Jones, a Pulitzer Prize winner and co-author of the 2000 Times history, "The Trust," said those attacking the paper should be looking at the administration's recent pattern of secrecy, citing as an example the domestic wiretapping story the Times broke late last year.

Or, perhaps they should be looking at the NYT's self-appointed status as principal information pipeline to Osama Bin Laden.

"This administration has demonstrated a pattern of secrecy that has been extreme," he told E&P. "They were, in my opinion, entirely wrong regarding whether the press needed to know about the domestic eavesdropping without warrants."

Ah - at last, we come to the crux of the matter. The principal information pipeline to Osama Bin Laden's pride is wounded, because they weren't in the loop.

While Jones acknowledged that the Times, in Keller's own words, made a close-call on the bank records story, he said the overriding factor needs to be erring on the side of disclosure rather than government secrecy.

IN WARTIME?

"...this should not distract from the larger point of the need for Americans to know more, not less."

Translation: Your right to know supercedes your right to exist.

 

[musicman]

Frankel said there is a danger that the public can become convinced that such moves by newspapers are based on efforts to oppose national interest rather than report the truth.

Well, damned if the public hasn't taken a boatload of convincing - but the good old NYT has proven itself equal to the task. I think we're finally getting the idea.

 

[Stephanie]

I don't recall voting for these elitist dickhead so called(journalist) to be my checks and balance of the President of the United States..

If he was using this information against his political opponents,(as we know past President's have), I could understand it...

But to release information used in our fight against a fanatical group that would love nothing more than to see us wiped off the face of this earth.......

And then they have the nerve to talk down at us, like we are angry just because, it's all a rightwing conspiracy to get back at liberals(as this jerk had the stupidity to say) and then say it will blow over and be laughed about........

I'm spitting mad just typing this, that if I saw these nyt's people right now, I'd kick their little balls back up into their tight asses....

Screw them, hit them where it hurts, (besides their litte ballies)....
IN THE WALLET.....

Never forget 9/11

 

[musicman]

I don't recall voting for these elitist dickhead so called(journalist) to be my checks and balance of the President of the United States..

If he was using this information against his political opponents,(as we know past President's have), I could understand it...

But to release information used in our fight against a fanatical group that would love nothing more than to see us wiped off the face of this earth.......

And then they have the nerve to talk down at us, like we are angry just because, it's all a rightwing conspiracy to get back at liberals(as this jerk had the stupidity to say) and then say it will blow over and be laughed about........

I'm spitting mad just typing this, that if I saw these nyt's people right now, I'd kick their little balls back up into their tight asses....

Screw them, hit them where it hurts, (besides their litte ballies)....
IN THE WALLET.....

Never forget 9/11

Couldn't agree more, Stephanie - and I love your wording. I am equally as outraged, and desirous of seeing some real consequences here. I will, however, take exception with one small part of your post - the section where you refer to these "journalists'" tight asses. You've got to figure that a group of people who can so completely pervert a once noble profession have allowed that perversion to spill into other aspects of their lives, as well. I imagine their asses are...how shall I say it...pretty well-travelled!:teeth:

 

[Stephanie]

Couldn't agree more, Stephanie - and I love your wording. I am equally as outraged, and desirous of seeing some real consequences here. I will, however, take exception with one small part of your post - the section where you refer to these "journalists'" tight asses. You've got to figure that a group of people who can so completely pervert a once noble profession have allowed that perversion to spill into other aspects of their lives, as well. I imagine their asses are...how shall I say it...pretty well-travelled!:teeth:

Weeellllllll, I wrote that their asses are tight, because they talk down us like their shit doesn't stink... So I assumed they must of never taken a dump in their lives(unless you want to call what they've been writing in their so called Newspaper a dump, ) which I WILL. And to me their becoming dangerous to all of us..


But see the thing is, I can smell all their all the way up here in Alaska......


Hit them where it hurts in their Ba..........I mean WALLETS.