You have commented 339 times on Rantburg.

Your Name
Your e-mail (optional)
Website (optional)
My Original Nic        Pic-a-Nic        Sorry. Comments have been closed on this article.
Bold Italic Underline Strike Bullet Blockquote Small Big Link Squish Foto Photo
Home Front: WoT
Keller Gloats
2006-07-02

Keller on Face the Nation this morning:
Mr. KELLER: But, I mean, I don't think this is all politics, I think the administration's a little embarrassed. They--this is the most secretive White House we've had since the Nixon White House, I think, by general acceptance, and I think they're a little embarrassed that they've had so much trouble holding on to their secrets.

SCHIEFFER: One of the more interesting reactions came from your competitor, The Wall Street Journal. Now, they did publish the story after it became known that you were going to publish the story, but they used some very strong language. In fact, I think at one point they said something that you had taken one of the most powerful weapons in the US arsenal and exposed it. What was your reaction to--to the way the Journal reacted?

Mr. KELLER: I think people who should react to The Wall Street Journal editorial are the--are the people over in The Wall Street Journal's newsroom, who must have been cringing with embarrassment to read, kind of, what the people on their opinion pages were saying. Because they wrote that story and although they were not--because they were a little late coming to the story, they were not asked by the administration not to publish.

SCHIEFFER: Well, to the contrary. As I understand it, from the Journal'seditorial, they were actually given the story after it became known that you all had the story. Is that unusual in journalism...

Mr. KELLER: It's--it's...

SCHIEFFER: ...for the government to give somebody else's story to another newspaper?

Mr. KELLER: No, that's not that unusual a tactic. A lot of times when they are aware that one newspaper's going to publish something, they will give it to other papers in hopes that first of all you get the whole story out in onefell swoop, rather than have it trickle out over, over days or weeks, and you also have more of a chance to put your own spin on it.

SCHIEFFER: If you had something to say to people in America on this Fourth of July weekend about all this, what would it be, Mr. Keller?

Mr. KELLER: I guess I would say if you're under the impression that the presss is neutral in this war on terror, or that we're agnostic--and you could get that impression from some of the criticism--that couldn't be more wrong. We have people traveling in the front lines with soldiers in Iraq and Afghanistan. We've had people who've been murdered in trying to figure out the terrorist threat. You know, we live in cities that are targets, proven targets, for the terrorists. So we--we're not neutral in this.

Now, if we were to quote Keller like he quotes Bush, the quote would be "We're not neutral in this."

Quite so.

Posted by:KBK

#7  Schieffer and Keller: Mutual masterbation.

Mr. Keller should be in a PMITA (Pound-Me-In-The-ASS) Federal Prison married to Bubba for a few years for treason. Schieffer should be retired (or dead of old age by now).

Bush and company better do something about this open treason or *THEY* (Bush and Co) will lose the WOT for us.
Posted by: CrazyFool   2006-07-02 23:42  

#6  We will routinely snip ellipses, [snip]'s, etc to save space and loading time. We assume that all news articles are being edited. If you think that a particular snip or ellipse needs to be there to ensure that the article won't be mis-understand, indicate that and we'll leave it alone. Thanks, AoS.
Posted by: Steve White   2006-07-02 23:40  

#5  KBK/115AS: legit complaint if it misrepresents (or allows an illegitimate gripe re:) the quote, IMHO
Posted by: Frank G   2006-07-02 21:20  

#4  KBK: No [snips] or ellipses at Rantburg. I don't like it either, but I don't write the rules.
Posted by: 11A5S   2006-07-02 20:50  

#3  I'd appreciate it if the Rantburg editors didn't remove the ellipses I used to indicate that a whole section of the interview was passed over. It's only five characters. What is the reason for taking the time to edit out what I added? They are necessary to make an accurate quote; otherwise you are subject to the criticism that you changed the meaning of a quote by selective editing.
Posted by: KBK   2006-07-02 19:38  

#2  "...I think they're a little embarrassed that they've had so much trouble holding on to their secrets."

They'd have a lot less trouble holding on to them if Sultzberber, Keller, the reporters, and the scumbags who leaked to them were given a 5-minute trial for treason, lined up against a wall, and executed by firing squad.

Sooner or later it's going to come to that, because these people just don't know when to stop.

Posted by: Dave D.   2006-07-02 19:18  

#1  I'd encourage anyone (with the access) to publish Bil Keller's and Pinch Sulzbergers', as well as other major NYT stockholders', addresses, pictures of the driveway and security measures (like the NYT's Travel section on Cheney and Rumsfeld), since this is now the standard of the "public's right to know".
Posted by: Frank G   2006-07-02 18:52  

00:00