PDA

View Full Version : The Washington Post is retarded



Shek
20 Dec 05,, 14:48
The WP is retarded, liars, or both. A newspaper article appears that tells OBL his commo is being monitored, and then he stops using those methods of communicaitons. While it may seem like an innocuous leak to Mr. Kessler, it was nonetheless a leak that led directly to a change in habit. If even, he reinforces President Bush's point that we've already damaged the NSA operation.


Washington Post
December 20, 2005
Pg. 8

Osama Bin Laden And The Leak That Wasn't


In his news conference yesterday, President Bush twice pointed to the same example to express his concern about the danger of newspaper leaks -- Osama bin Laden's phone.

"The fact that we were following Osama bin Laden because he was using a certain type of telephone made it into the press as the result of a leak," the president said. "And guess what happened? Saddam -- Osama bin Laden changed his behavior. He began to change how he communicated."

Later, the president repeated the example and decried what he called "revealing sources, methods and what we use the information for" as helping "the enemy" change its behavior.

But the reality is more complicated. :rolleyes:

The White House says the president was referring to a profile of the al Qaeda leader that appeared in the Washington Times on Aug. 21, 1998. In the 21st paragraph, the article stated: "He keeps in touch with the world via computers and satellite phones and has given occasional interviews to international news organizations."

The information in the article does not appear to be based on any government leak and made no reference to government surveillance of bin Laden's phone.

But the relatively minor bit of detail had a big impact on bin Laden. "He stopped using the satellite phone instantly," wrote Daniel Benjamin and Steven Simon in their book "The Age of Sacred Terror," and thus "the United States lost its best chance to find him."

-- Glenn Kessler

Bluesman
20 Dec 05,, 15:35
A lot - a WHOLE LOT - of what the MSM, including such flagships as the WaPo, the NYT, CBS and CNN, have done since 9/11 has led me to the conclusion that they actually are against American victory in this war. Ordinarily, I'd dismiss comments like that as John Birch Society-esque. But taken as a whole and in their entirety, I no longer doubt the MSM's sympathies, and they do not lie with their country's best interests in this war.

I'm not talking about being organs of state security or a propaganda arm of the government. I AM talking about going out of their way to damage, obstruct, and retard the vital work that goes on to secure the safety of the nation, and their obvious hostility to it.

I question certain American's patriotism, you BET I do. Some in the media, some in public office, some in Hollywood, and some in the upper reaches of wealth. They are not acting against their country in ignorance, nor in idealistic fervor. They know exactly what they're doing, and they mean for a certain result to follow their actions. It is NOT the result that an American patriot would work toward.

Shek
20 Dec 05,, 15:56
A lot - a WHOLE LOT - of what the MSM, including such flagships as the WaPo, the NYT, CBS and CNN, have done since 9/11 has led me to the conclusion that they actually are against American victory in this war. Ordinarily, I'd dismiss comments like that as John Birch Society-esque. But taken as a whole and in their entirety, I no longer doubt the MSM's sympathies, and they do not lie with their country's best interests in this war.

I'm not talking about being organs of state security or a propaganda arm of the government. I AM talking about going out of their way to damage, obstruct, and retard the vital work that goes on to secure the safety of the nation, and their obvious hostility to it.

I question certain American's patriotism, you BET I do. Some in the media, some in public office, some in Hollywood, and some in the upper reaches of wealth. They are not acting against their country in ignorance, nor in idealistic fervor. They know exactly what they're doing, and they mean for a certain result to follow their actions. It is NOT the result that an American patriot would work toward.

To be fair, it was the conservative archrival of the Post, the Washington Times, that leaked the SATCOM detail of OBL.

Bluesman
20 Dec 05,, 16:19
To be fair, it was the conservative archrival of the Post, the Washington Times, that leaked the SATCOM detail of OBL.

I noticed that. But what I'm going off about is the TRENDLINE, the day-to-day attempts and outright campaigns that attempt to lead us to defeat in this war. And I cannot reach any other conclusion than that these media outlets, considered to be 'elite', are not dispassionate observers, merely reporting fact with an unbiased and neutral stance. They are advocates, but not for their country.

If the Wasington Times or National Review or Fox reports inconvenient facts that have an incidentally bad effect on the war effort, well, that's the job of EVERY responsible news organization, and bully for them for being honest. I expect to hear some bad news during the war, because this is a tough fight, and the Good Guys don't always win. No problem. Likewise, if they put a foot wrong and report that which could've helped the war had it remained secret (which I think the Times did in the cited piece), I do not automatically ascribe the same motives to them that I would to an organization that consistently shows where their sympathies lie.

What I'm talking about, though, is a concerted, planned and distinct effort to make certain thay've done all they can to prevent success in this war.