| Submit your comments on this article |
| Home Front: WoT |
| A Crack in the Arrogance? |
| 2006-10-24 |
| What do you call it when the ombudsman of the New York Times admits he made a mistake? A good start. New York Times ombudsman Byron Calame has initiated what we can only hope will be a trend in AmericaÂ’s holier-than-thou media -- that overwhelming and influential part of our nationÂ’s news business that feigns objectivity, fairness and interest in our national well-being while relentlessly pursuing partisan and destructively anti-American agendas. Calame, in the throws of some inexplicable crisis of conscience, has admitted his newspaper was wrong to reveal a secret U.S. government program to monitor bank transactions of terrorists, and that he was not only wrong but hypocritical to defend it. He did not mention hopelessly lacking in perspective, but IÂ’ll get to that. Calame has acknowledged that the United States governmentÂ’s Swift program to monitor overseas banking transactions in order to zero in on suspected terrorists was legal, under appropriate oversight, and posed no threat to law-abiding Americans. He acknowledged that, but for his prejudices, he could have arrived at this conclusion upon reading the original article. He acknowledged that it was a bad idea for the New York Times to reveal this program to our enemies, over the objections of our government, four months ago. CalameÂ’s mea culpa has a bit of the dog-ate-my-homework about it. As blogger Don Surber noted, Calame blamed his opinion in part for his sympathy with the "underdog" -- the New York Times -- under the onslaught of vociferous reaction from the Bush administration to its reporting. On what planet the New York Times is underdog, I donÂ’t know. And perhaps it was nagging embarrassment at his own excess enthusiasm for unwarranted victimhood that prompted CalameÂ’s about-face. But thatÂ’s beside the point. There has been at least one outraged and well-principled call for CalameÂ’s resignation, at the prominent conservative blog www.patterico.com. But not so fast, Byron.Your work is not done. You may yet redeem yourself. Prior to exiting, Byron, you may consider launching a soul-searching campaign at the New York Times.IÂ’d encourage a look at the decision to report on the National Security AgencyÂ’s warrantless electronic monitoring of emails and phone calls between the United States and suspect individual overseas.The outrage your paper and others stirred up over a program that falls well within the law and harms no law-abiding American citizen, and the notice you served to terrorists and their supporters of its existence, constitute aid and comfort to the enemy in time of war. But donÂ’t stop there.You have been greatly privileged -- beyond your merit -- to hold a lofty and influential position overseeing the morality and ethics of our newsgathering profession. The American media is morally and ethically adrift, and in need of guidance.You could be the one, based on this revelation, to provide some. Faced with a spreading threat to our fundamental values and freedoms by Islamic fascists, the media in the United States is predominantly of the view, and encourages the belief, that the United States government in its execution of conventional and unconventional war against clearly demonstrated threats poses the greater threat to our way of life. Our media has repeatedly propagated falsehoods about what the administration and the president have said, about what was known and about what in some cases has been borne out about the threats we have faced from al Qaeda, Saddam Hussein and others. This has been done to such an extent that reasonable people cannot be blamed for believing their president lied to them before committing troops to battle. To the extent that some seemingly responsible people now question whether we face any threat at all. The history leading up to the conflicts and crises we face has been repeatedly misrepresented, in a manner that undercuts the authority of a wartime president and threatens the credibility of our nation in the world -- the single most important nation in maintaining stability in the world. The American media and the American left are now convinced Iraq is a lost cause and are doing everything they can to convince the American people of that. It is a prelude to what could become a shameless betrayal of the Iraqi people and a disparagement of the American and Iraqi blood that has been spilled. Regardless of whether it is for political gain or from deeply held if misguided beliefs, they are eager to take actions that, for short-term gratification, would prompt massive bloodshed far beyond what we are seeing now and plant the seeds of future wars. The left offered no viable plan for how they would have handled a Saddam Hussein bent on re-arming had this war not been initiated, nor have they yet offered a viable plan for ending or exiting this war.Unless one considers a Vietnam-like abandonment of Iraq viable, and even a cursory glance backward tells us it isnÂ’t. Walking away is never a solution. Without overly belaboring the point, the fall of Vietnam, Laos and Cambodia tell us it isnÂ’t. The Soviet invasion of Afghanistan, the Iranian hostage crisis, the Lebanon barracks bombing, Mogadishu, the East African embassy bombings, the USS Cole, and Sept. 11 -- all conducted with the well-founded belief that we would run or do nothing -- tells us it isnÂ’t. But with Byron CalameÂ’s remarkable admission, we see what could be the beginnings of an awakening. IÂ’m not holding my breath.But IÂ’m an optimist.And I think I just saw a hairline crack in the arrogance of one of AmericaÂ’s most powerful media institutions. |
| Posted by:DanNY |
| #2 I am still hoping that Arthur will buy back all but the employee owned stock before it's value reaches zero. |
| Posted by: anon 2006-10-24 11:26 |
| #1 Too little, too late, NY Times. We'll all feel better after you've bled to death. |
| Posted by: wxjames 2006-10-24 11:15 |