Seeker Blog

The NYT demonstrates again that logic is not required in the study of “journalism”. First, have a look at the analysis by Richard Fernandez, which states in small part:

…Posting very sensitive, undoubtedly secret restricted data is treason, isn’t it? And very irresponsible. The NYT should know. I’m rather disappointed in the Times for warning me, this late in the game, of the terrible dangers that lurked in Saddam’s archives. Recipes for unthinkable weapons that could have been given to just anyone, something Saddam surely wouldn’t do unlike the Bush administration which evidently would. They should have warned us sooner, such as during the days when Abu Nidal was in residence in Baghdad, and all those men of good will who are now cutting off the heads of Iraqis by the gross were in charge of those very documents whose shadow menaces the world. But they really didn’t exist then, did they? And even if they did they were in safe hands. Because if they did, then taking down Saddam was a responsible thing to do. But they exist now and releasing those newly existing secrets is a terribly irresponsible thing to do. It was the dream of alchemists to turn lead into gold and they failed. The NYT has succeeded.

Second, see Tom Maguire’s Two Quick Hits On Those Iraqi Nuclear Plans, which demonstrates the partisan flip-flopping of the NYT favorite [today] nuclear “expert” Dr. Zimmerman.

Similarly revealing of the Times pre-election strategy is the takedown of the NYT own James Risen:

The Times is ignoring the fine work of their own James Risen - in the same book which revealed the NSA warrantless surveillance program Mr. Risen reported that Clinton’s CIA provided vital nuclear designs to the Iranians in a sting gone sour:

In January 2006, James Risen, a New York Times reporter, alleged in his book State of War that in February 2000, a U.S. covert operation - code-named Operation Merlin - had backfired. It originally aimed to provide Iran with a flawed design for building a nuclear weapon, in order to delay the alleged Iranian nuclear weapons programme. Instead, the plan may have accelerated Iran’s nuclear programme by providing useful information, once the flaws were identified.