The New York Times {Crimes} At It Yet Again.

Hey folks,

If you turned on ANY news outlet, read ANY number of Internet news outlets, you saw the same thing I did. The New York Crimes has done it again. There are so many different places you can find various versions of this story, I’ll just stick with ME and the actual people involved of committing yet MORE crimes. The New Your Crimes, I mean Times.

Remember back to Wednesday, May 17, 2006 I said

"I have an honest question. Why does ANYONE read this paper? OK, I know, I already know the answer. The Left read it because it is their paper. Custom written for them. The NYT furthers the liberal agenda like noone else. The Right read it because, let’s face it, it is an easy example of the liberal media."

I pointed out the fact that they violate their own ethics policies on a daily bases and even pointed out to you where their Ethics Policy Website was. I pointed out some of the many examples of the ways they do this.

Then, the NYT "breaks" the wire tapping story. This was proven to be false. Then they "break" the story of the top secret money tracking system, causing this most effective tool to be done away with. Did I mention we are at war. I know this is a hard concept for the NYT. Then it was Intelligence Committee report. They are the ones that leaked, I mean reported this, thinking it would rile up the LWL base and anti-war crowd, right before the elections.

Are they guilty of treason? I believe that if you truly analyze this situation out, you will see that this is more than just making stuff up, which they have been known to do, or printing inaccurate stories. This is purposely risking the security of this country, just to attack the Bush Administration. They are either purposely doing so, or too ignorant to help themselves.

Now the latest, NYT-"Bush Aide’s Memo Doubts Iraqi Leader"

WASHINGTON, Nov. 29 — A classified memorandum by President Bush’s national security adviser expressed serious doubts about whether Prime Minister Nuri Kamal al Maliki had the capacity to control the sectarian violence in Iraq and recommended that the United States take new steps to strengthen the Iraqi leader’s position."

WAIT A SECOND! CLASSIFIED. This means folks, it is not for general consumption. It is NOT meant to be plastered all over the front page of a major newspaper. They try to justify this and I’m sure we will hear the LWL talking point pointing this possible fact out later on. More on that in a second.

"The Nov. 8 memo was prepared for Mr. Bush and his top deputies by Stephen J. Hadley, the national security adviser, and senior aides on the staff of the National Security Council after a trip by Mr. Hadley to Baghdad.

The memo suggests that if Mr. Maliki fails to carry out a series of specified steps, it may ultimately be necessary to press him to reconfigure his parliamentary bloc, a step the United States could support by providing "monetary support to moderate groups," and by sending thousands of additional American troops to Baghdad to make up for what the document suggests is a current shortage of Iraqi forces

The memo presents an unvarnished portrait of Mr. Maliki and notes that he relies for some of his political support on leaders of more extreme Shiite groups. The five-page document, classified secret, is based in part on a one-on-one meeting between Mr. Hadley and Mr. Maliki on Oct. 30.

"His intentions seem good when he talks with Americans, and sensitive reporting suggests he is trying to stand up to the Shia hierarchy and force positive change," the memo said of the Iraqi leader. "But the reality on the streets of Baghdad suggests Maliki is either ignorant of what is going on, misrepresenting his intentions, or that his capabilities are not yet sufficient to turn his good intentions into action."

Notice this is being released right before a scheduled meeting between President Bush and Prime Minister Nuri Kamal al Maliki? The New York Crimes even admits that this memo, or THEM releasing it to the general public, "will undoubtedly color the meeting between the two leaders on Thursday morning." Why else do you think THEY , the NY Crimes released it?

Now they are trying to say, "Hey they {The Bush Administration} gave it to them, therefore we were permitted to ‘report it.’" They write,


"An administration official made a copy of the document available to a New York Times reporter seeking information on the administration’s policy review. The Times read and transcribed the memo."Text of The Memo as they printed it.

"Two senior administration officials, who insisted on anonymity in exchange for talking about a classified memo, said it was unclear whether Mr. Maliki had seen the memo this morning, but suggested its contents would be no surprise to the Iraqi prime minister, who has been in regular consultation with Mr. Bush"

STOP! First there was one that released it to the NY Crimes, now it’s TWO?

"On Tuesday, a senior administration official discussed the memorandum in general terms after being told The New York Times was preparing an article on the subject. The official described the document as "essentially a trip report" and not a result of the administration’s review of its Iraq policy, which is still under way.

He said the purpose of the memo "was to provide a snapshot of the challenges facing Prime Minister Maliki and how we can best enhance his capabilities, mindful of the complex political and security environment in which he is operating."

So who did it? OK Let me ask you this. Someone goes in a robs a jewelry story, this would be a crime, correct? Now lets say they give the jewelry to you. YOU, are now guilty of receiving stolen merchandise. Correct? Now let’s say you make that jewelry available to everyone, for a price of course. Are you NOT guilty of a crime? Selling stolen merchandise? How much more important do you think that NATIONAL SECURITY, and our relationship with the new government of the country we are fight for, than a necklace?

Someone has to investigate the NYT. They have to bring charges where charges are needed. That includes any administration offical involved as well. If it means shutting down the paper completely for treason, then do it. If it means arresting those that continue to commit crimes, then do it. Give the NY Crimes another chance under different ownership or management if you want, but they MUST be stopped from committing further crimes. And it IS, just that simple.
Peter