It is not not difficult to find points of disagreement with the New York Times. However, the paper occasionally does something (or in this case plans to do something) which makes one wonder if it really is as anti-US as its actions would indicate. From Brad Thor writing at Big Government:
I have just received word that the New York Times is preparing to go public with a list of names of Americans covertly working in Afghanistan providing force protection for our troops, as well as the rest of our Coalition Forces. If the Times actually sees this through, the red ink they are drowning in will be nothing compared to the blood their entire organization will be covered with. Make no mistake, the Times is about to cause casualty rates in Afghanistan to skyrocket. Each and every American should be outraged.
Transparency in governance is well and good–but transparency which is available to the enemy at a time of war? That is rank.
Through its use of the New York Times, the Central Intelligence Agency has tried to embarrass the Defense Department into shutting down what, by all accounts, has been an amazingly successful program which has dramatically saved American and Coalition lives and continues to do so on a daily basis.
But thanks to the beating the folks on the 7th floor at Langley and the New York Times have taken in the blogosphere, they are about to go for broke and to do so in a fashion so grotesque that every American should be moved to action.
The skinny is this: US military leadership in Afghanistan has not been happy with much of the help that they have been provided by the CIA. Therefore, they’ve figured out their own approaches to getting the information they need. The CIA is engaged in a bit of a turf war as a result (apparently more interested in being the only folks who are permitted to gain intelligence of the enemy via covert operations) and are going to take this conflict to the pages the New York Times.
Our opponents in Afghanistan must be salivating over the prospects. Not just of finding out who previously hidden opponents are, but at the fact that the United States military and intelligence are battling each other — making the actual conflict in Afghanistan suffer as a result.
I’ve sent the following to email@example.com
Dear Mr. Sulzberger,
It has come to my attention that the New York Times intends to publish the names of those who are covertly working to support our troops who are fighting in Afghanistan. I would ask you to seriously reconsider this action in light of the damage it will do to the individuals on the list, the overall war effort in Afghanistan, and the increasingly frayed relationship between our country’s military and intelligence groups.
May you do likewise (in your own words) should you be so inclined.