By Greg Michael
Does the New York Times have a liberal agenda? Does any adult who follows the news believe that they attempt to tell a fair and balanced view?
So they printed details about how the Bush Administration’s Homeland Security and NSA department track money transactions with proven terrorist groups.
Read this from the female Mark Twain of our time, Ann Coulter.
But now we’re told newspapers have a right to commit treason because of “freedom of the press.” Liberals invoke “freedom of the press” like some talismanic formulation that requires us all to fall prostrate in religious ecstasy. On liberals’ theory of the First Amendment, the safest place for Osama bin Laden isn’t in Afghanistan or Pakistan; it’s in The New York Times building.
Freedom of the press means the government generally cannot place a prior restraint on speech before publication.
But freedom of the press does not mean the government cannot prosecute reporters and editors for treason — or for any other crime. The First Amendment does not mean Times editor Bill Keller could kidnap a child and issue his ransom demands from The New York Times editorial page. He could not order a contract killing on the op-ed page. Nor can he take out a contract killing on Americans with a Page One story on a secret government program being used to track terrorists who are trying to kill Americans.
What if, instead of passing information from the government’s secret nuclear program at Los Alamos directly to Soviet agents, Julius and Ethel Rosenberg had printed those same secrets in a newsletter? Would they have skated away scot-free instead of being tried for espionage and sent to the death chamber?
The only good to come out of the NYT’s publicity stunt is that they are accelerating their own stockholder revolt and the eventual breakup of their media monopoly.