Anti-American Terrorism and The New York Times
by Rense Johnson, Chairman, Citizens for Term Limits
Part I
Friday evening, June 23, 1906, on Fox News program Special Report, the All- Star discussion group’s first topic of discourse was the New York Times’s deliberate publication of a story exposing America’s most valuable tool for locating terrorists— the tracing of funds transfers to these same terrorists throughout the world, from source to destination.
Why is this so beneficial to our anti-terrorist workers? Because it names the sources of the funds, naming names of banks, intermediaries and ultimate beneficiaries.
Treasury Undersecretary Stewart Levey called the program incredibly powerful . . . incredibly valuable. He explained that it was so effective because it provided actual names with addresses and phone numbers of those who plan to harm us.
The Times is published by Arthur Sulzberger, Jr.
The New York Times’s action was a knowingly and brazenly calculated breach of American security, despite pleas to refrain from many sources, both domestic and international, from our government from the President and others, from heads of central banks in Europe, our Federal Reserve, the two leaders of the Nine-Eleven Commission, and even reportedly, Congressman John Murtha, certainly no friend of the current Administration.
One cannot but wonder at the unmitigated conceit of Sulzberger’s Times, sure that when it broke the story it would be followed te next day by similar stories in the Washington Post, Los Angeles Times and Wall Street Journal.
Mort Kondrake believes that hatred for President Bush has led the Times to take an adversarial attitude toward its own government — which is a heinous posture in time of war.
Fred Barnes pointed out that this is not the first “score” for the Times. Its editors had also been the first to report the National Security Agency’s eavesdropping program. Barnes called it a “pattern.”
Charles Krauthammer likened it to a newspaper in the midst of World War II announcing that the Allies had broken the famous German Enigma code.
Did the Times’s grandstanding make America more or less safe? To ask the question is to answer it. If this isn’t giving aid and comfort to the enemy, I don’t know what is. Because our First Amendment grants freedom to the press, the Times takes it as license. There are those who believe that giving aid and comfort to the enemy during time of war is treason.
The fact that we have not yet had another nine-eleven attack within our shores is testimony to the anti-terrorism vigilance of our various intelligence agencies using tools such as the money tracing program. To the extent that compromising the program can make us much more vulnerable, Sulzberger and his Times can take credit.
Anti-American Terrorism, Part II
The second topic of discussion that evening was the discovery of a home-grown terrorist cell of seven members in Miami, Florida, with sworn allegiance to Al Quaida. According to news sources:
“Seven people were arrested Thursday night in Miami, Florida, and charged with four counts conspiracy to provide material support to al Qaida, and conspiracy to provide material support and resources to terrorists, Gonzales told a news conference.
“They were also charged with conspiracy to maliciously damage and destroy buildings by explosion, and conspiracy to levy war against the government of the United States.”
Derisively called “The gang who couldn’t shoot straight,” by Krauthammer, they were nevertheless deadly serious in their attitudes and intent.
They hoped to bring down Chicago’s Sears Tower, tallest in the U. S., although it would appear they had more desire than ability. Failing at the Tower, they had a fall-back building or buildings in Miami.
These people were overtly plotting against America, planning to harm us in every way within their power
Question: which is the greater threat to America— the gang who couldn’t shoot straight, or Sulzberger’s lethal New York Times???
Someone later suggested that the Times folks are the kind of people who during World War II would have not hesitated to publish—if they had it— details of D Day; that is, the June 6 1944 date and Normandy landing location, because of the public’s “right to know.”
For these people, patriotism is an anachronism
