Sep 12 2006

The Incoherent NY Times

Published by at 8:03 am under All General Discussions

The NY Times is one of the most incoherent news organizations I have seen. After exposing the NSA Terrorist Surveillance Program (which is nothing new per the Church Committee Report from 1978) and the SWIFT terrorist financial tracking program, and after all sorts of reports and editorials claiming Bush is hyping the war, that since we have not had an attack we should pull out of the ME, that Bush is war mongering, the NY Times leads with this line:

Last night, President Bush once again urged Americans to take terrorism seriously — a warning that hardly seems necessary. One aspect of that terrible day five years ago that seems immune to politicization or trivialization is the dread of another attack.

The NY Times is claiming everyone knows there is the threat of a new attack? So they exposed our anti-terrorism defenses on the word of partisan hacks anyway? Knowing we are under threat – which they now claim is obvious – the NY Times alerted those same enemies to what methods we used to stop them? The next sentence is a stunning admission of BDS:

When Mr. Bush warns that Al Qaeda means what it says, that there are Islamist fanatics around the world who wish us harm and that the next assault could be even worse than the last, he does not need to press the argument.

Well, actually he does have to remind people, especially those in the advanced stages of BDS like the NY Times that their actions have serious and life ending consequences. Putting Americans in harm’s way to garner some votes or congressional seats is not a joke or game. While politics can be rough, it is not meant to snuff out lives. The NY Times is the perfect example of why Bush has to come out and apply some adult supervision to a lot of self obsessed, immature people who seem to forget or ignore the stakes here. The fact that they still do not get it means Bush needs to come out and say it some more until the NY Times realizes some political games are outright dangerous. Buy a clue NY Times.

25 responses so far

25 Responses to “The Incoherent NY Times”

  1. pagar says:

    “botched”” to spoil by poor or clumsy work.

    Don’t know how to copy it, but on page 12 of the 28 pages, it will
    show that in 2004, 4008 motorcyclists botched their job bad enough
    to be listed as killed in the United States.In 2005, that number increased to 4315 killed.
    Based on that, I conclude that the military has done a much less botched job in Iraq than some people think

  2. pull says:

    Iraq as an enemy creating debacle? Really, people, time to be honest.

    We freed these people from the tyranny of Saddam. We did something the Shiites and Kurds had been begging for.

    It is true, you do good to those poisoned by Islam… they will hate you all the more.

    This only means we have to deal with Islam now, not later.

    Later the “Islamic nuclear bomb” will be in their hands.

    It is sad when people start to argue we should leave Iraq like we dumped South Vietnam. Then the activists supported the Viet Cong and Khmer Rouge using the exact same arguments… today they support Al Qaeda and other Islamo-Fascists.

  3. For Enforcement says:

    Ken, thanks for the slanted link, I can give you any number of links to stories from Iraqi’s that are thankful to be alive, especially since they are in the group that likely would be dead now if Saddam were still in charge. So just what good is one person’s opinion. I didn’t see where he said he was thankful to be alive.
    You said:
    “here is what the Iraqis are saying about Bush’s
    creating a giant prison which used to be a nation. And don’t believe
    America is not going to pay in the future for the deeds of the arrogant neocons who fueled this enemy-creating debacle.”
    You being a neodem, give me the definition of an arrogant neocon.

    Retired spook, you give Ken to much credit. I’m pretty sure he’s not that old yet. But your statement about Barbra Streisand, she is talented, but there is no way in hell I would listen to her music. There are too many talented singers in this world that DON’T hate the US to listen to those that do.

  4. wiley says:

    So, I guess Ken wants to go back to the hands-off, fun-loving days of the nineties, when we were so much respected and admired. Of course, Ken & his liberal ilk are clueless. Just because the leftwing talking points say we’re creating more terrorists by fighting them in Afghanistan & Iraq doesn’t make it so — there’s no firm supporting data. I’ll take a defeated or dead Islamo fascist in the ME over a stealth, scheming one in the West any day.

    From the moment we went to war in Afghanistan & later Iraq, the Dems & lefties have been labeling it Vietnam all over again. Is it? Of course not. But to their deranged perspective, Vietnam was winning. They were right, don’t you know? The peaceniks & protesters won the day. The anti-authority, anti-establishment, anti-military liberals made their mark. Now, Iraq is their Vietnam all over again. Or so they try. If only the middle america imbeciles would wake up, we can cut & run, defeated, but just get out of there. Everyone will like us better, and we can open up a dialogue and promise that we’ll respect them … and that’s winning, because we’ll be a better country.
    Fortunately, most amercians see thru this inanity. As Retired Spook says, we’ll find out soon enough.

  5. Ken says:

    Myself, Michael Scheuer, George Will, Pat Buchanan, William Buckley, Generals Odum, Anthony Zinni, Chuck Hagel ,Congressman Walter “freedom fries” Jones (NC) and the approximately 50% of self-identifying conservatives (of various stripes, to be sure as I am more nearly a Buchananite, than a Buckleyite) are not “neodems.”

    What is irksome is not the possible name-tagging
    assumptions by many here;what is troublesome is many ostrich-like
    Iraq War conservative defenders in these parts don’t seem to
    realize they might be in the minority in their own conservative domain.