Michelle Malkin via Charles Johnson of LGF fame this past weekend shown the spotlight on a NYT ……

Why in the world would anyone ever believe a photo would be presented correctly? I am over any naivete where NYTrash is concerned.

How do the people who work there sleep at night? Because of the soldiers fighting to protect their precious RIGHTS. How can they face themselves in the mirror? They, as a group, have no shame, no consciences, no morals.

Putrid rag – hope it goes bankrupt!

EFFETE MURDERERS: This terrorist, Joao Silva and the New York Times
So the New York Times thinks they’ve got themselves a real scoop here. They got themselves some photos of terrorist murderers trying to kill American Soldiers! Aren’t they just some…

Little Green Footballs (via Ace of Spades HQ) finds a photographer for the NY Times, Joao Silva, in a very suspicious position – he took pics while a terrorist fired on US troops in Iraq…

I edited Keller’s quote, snipping out a few words that made it longer than I wanted it to be but without changing the meaning of what he said. In context, Keller says what he says in Vent, but doesn’t say which side the press is on or which side it wants to win the war. He just says that it’s not neutral. Given that he doesn’t say which side the press is on, it’s up to us to figure it out, and the best way to do that is to examine the actions the press has taken since the war began.

Bingo.

* The jihadist/terrorists are becoming more sophisitcated readers of News media. Remember what happened to Danny Pearl in Afganistan? The backlash was very bad for their cause in the West. Since then journalists are pretty much hands off. The only one seriously in danger since then was Jill Carroll with the Christian science monitor, and ultimately she was released. I suspect she was more in danger because of the name of her organization than the fact that she was a journalist. They’re learning… be very nice, polite, and helpful to western journalists and you’ll help the cause.

Which brings me to my second point…

* They (jihadist/terrorists) are making the same mistake the Dem’s made during the 2004 Presidental election. Remember when the MSM weeks before the election kept giving Kerry a pass on the swift boat issue? When Brokaw brought it up, Kerry even muttered ” who’s side are you on?” The MSM kept saying Kerry by a land slide. The MSM even kept hawking the exit polls as Kerry being the winner until the real nunbers came in….AND THEY WERE COMPLETLEY WRONG James Taranto made the same point, sorry I can’t find it right now so I’m going to paraphrase, “had the mainstream media actually done it’s job and seriously questioned Kerry on the Swifties allegations instead of sweeping under the rug/pooh poohing them/attacking the messenger, then the Kerry campaign may have actually been able to do something and John Kerry may have been the POTUS.”

The point here is the MSM is STILL acting the same way they did during the 2004 election. Only this time they’re collective heads in the sand is going to get a bunch of people killed instead of just their candidate losing an election.

1. Treason against the United States shall consist only in levying war against them, or in adhering to their enemies, giving them aid and comfort.

The New York Times exposes a communications monitoring program that tracks terrorists.

in adhering to their enemies, giving them aid and comfort.

The New York Times exposes a financial tracking network which has aided in capturing terrorists.

in adhering to their enemies, giving them aid and comfort.

The New York Times publishes photographs, by one of it’s employees, showing terrorists shooting at American soldiers.

in adhering to their enemies, giving them aid and comfort.

When are those lickspittle, useless politicians in Washington going to get off the stick and charge the New York Times with treason????

Over the weekend Charles Johnson of Little Green Footballs talked about the NYCrimes new photo slideshow by Joao Silva. The photos show barbarians working their weapons during the periods from July 30 to November 3, 2003, from January 16 till April 1,…

Remember the “brutal Afghan winter?” Remember talk of a quagmire just a week into the Afghan campaign? Remember Eason Jordan admitting that CNN covered up for Saddam? And remember that same Eason Jordan accusing US troops of targeting journalists for murder? The press started out bad and has only gotten worse, to the point that the NYT publishes wartime secrets and its reporters tip off terrorists and its photographers shoot the war from the terrorists’ point of view.

Making it clear, to me anyway, which side the non-neutral press is on.

If the photo is “real” (in that the sniper is actually shooting at somebody), the Times’ employee is an accessory to a war crime. The Geneva Convention requires that combatants be in uniform, correct? So unless this photo is published as part of an “expose of evil”, or a documentary of war crimes, I think some guilt extends beyond the photographer and goes to the Times itself.

If the photo is staged, the Times itself is guilty of spreading enemy propaganda. The only thing missing from this picture would be Peter Arnett holding a microphone….

Dave Shay on July 17, 2006 at 1:53 PM

I couldn’t add anything more to this if I tried, so I’ll just leave those words again.

Thanks Dave Shay

Yes, the statement in today’s Vent does have some context removed and thus can be misleading.

Nevertheless, I’ll still contend that, in the context of the actions of the NYTimes under Keller’s direction, they are most definitely not neutral in the war on terror, and it’s not a big leap to figure out whose side I believe they are on. Keller is merely talking out of both sides of his mouth in a statement that can roughly be translated as “who are you going to believe – me or your lying eyes?”

Thirteen28…. sorry, but Bill Keller’s statement was taken out of context.

I’m not a fan of his or the NYT, but he admitted nothing. The second part of the quote was about Embedded media, trying to spin it as the Press is PRO West in the WOT.

Please, don’t stoop to misquoting, like the NYT’s does so often.

I suppose you can make that argument if you restrict the context only to the forum in which Keller was speaking when he uttered those words. However, when you put it in context with the actions of the NYTimes – revealing the NSA wiretaps and revealing the finance tracking program just to name two incidents - then it doesn’t look like a misquote at all.

Actions always speak louder than words, no matter what context the words were spoken in or how they were quoted. The actions of the NYTimes under Bill Keller’s direction clearly shows where their loyalties lie. So, if you’ll pardon me for “misquoting” again (or at least mis-paraphrasing), if you are under the impression that the NYTimes is neutral in this war on terror, you couldn’t be more wrong.

I’d like to see a two- to five-minute segment of the interview to get the context of Keller’s remark, or the full interview, with the FF and RW buttons enabled. If someone knows where either has been posted, I’d appreciate your posting the URL here. Thanks.

Well, gee. Maybe if they didn’t sleep with the enemy…

The photo in question reminds me very much of a B&W photo taken decades ago by a Times photographer during the siege of Hue City and the Tet Offensive.

The photo featured a scruffy, helmeted Marine leaning back in a kitchen chair, with his feet up on a table. Casually shooting through a ground-level, shelled out window at NVA troops across the street with his M-16.

The ignorant photographer used the word “Sniper” in the photo’s caption, too. What a Maroon!

Jack.