<< ROCKS OF PEACE ~ MAIN ~ "THE EARTH HAS A FEVER" >>

FEELS RIGHT, DO IT

New York Times editor Bill Keller on his paper’s decision not to publish those Danish Motoons:

Keller told USA Today that publishing the Mohammed cartoons would be “perceived as a particularly deliberate insult” by Muslims, and that, moreover, not publishing them “feels like the right thing to do.”

Seeing as Keller’s feelings are evidently an editorial test, we may assume he felt right about exposing a classified anti-terror program. The Los Angeles Times, the Washington Post, and the Wall Street Journal also ran pieces on the program—but, like the NYT, had earlier declined to publish newsworthy Danish ’toons. Washington Post executive editor Len Downie, back in February:

This newspaper vigorously exercises its freedom of expression every day. In doing so, we have standards for accuracy, fairness and taste that our readers have come to expect from The Post. We decided that publishing these cartoons would violate our standards.

Here’s a plan: instead of merely classifying its anti-terror programs, the US government should devise a code that renders the programs as Islam-mocking cartoons. Newspapers would never publish them.

Posted by Tim B. on 06/24/2006 at 04:47 PM
  1. Here’s a plan: instead of merely classifying its anti-terror programs, the US government should devise a code that renders the programs as Islam-mocking cartoons. Newspapers would never publish them.

    Terrific. Cause this plan, isn’t doing well.

    the peoples cube

    Posted by El Cid on 2006 06 24 at 05:17 PM • permalink

  2. I think Keller genuinely is stupid.

    You need a certain size organization to pull anything good off.  On the other hand, big organizations are easy to detect before they get anything going.

    The key to killing off global terrorism as a menace is to make the biggest you can grow an organization, too small to pull anything off.

    Through cooperation in tracking around the world, with friends and arm-twisted others, the largest organization you can run undetected is being brought down and down.

    Keller wants to make bigger terror organizations healthy again.

    It gives better news.

    Who can forget how revenues surged with the obits for WTC victims running each day!  Good times for newspapers.

    It’s just business.  Nothing personal

    Posted by rhhardin on 2006 06 24 at 06:28 PM • permalink

  3. The time has passed when I thought the large news organizations were merely disseminating only that information they judged it healthy for the unwashed masses to have.  I’m now beginning to view them as active enemies out to do actual harm.

    Posted by RebeccaH on 2006 06 24 at 06:39 PM • permalink

  4. BILL KELLER STOLE THE ELECTION!!!

    Posted by Jim Treacher on 2006 06 24 at 07:09 PM • permalink

  5. RebeccaH-seriously, at what point can we say that they are the enemy?

    Treason is still a crime, but it’s going to be impossible for us to prosecute anyone for it since Jihad Johnny Lindh didn’t have to face treason charges.

    Christ on a cracker-the little scumbag has his own website!!!

    Posted by 68W40 on 2006 06 24 at 08:00 PM • permalink

  6. 91B30, that’s just wrong.

    Posted by RebeccaH on 2006 06 24 at 08:53 PM • permalink

  7. The economics of this is clear enough: al Qaeda generates copy. Copy sells papers. Selling papers increases circulation. Increased circulation increases Times revenues. Increased Times revenues puts money into Bill Keller’s pocket. Ergo, the more help the Times gives al Qaeda, the fatter is Bill Keller’s pocketbook.

    So, if my son, who’s in Iraq now, were to be killed by a terrorist whose financing the Times assisted, Bill Keller would print the story of his death, push some more papers out the door, and fatten his year-end bonus. Makes sense to me.

    What a jagoff that man is.

    Posted by Urbs in Horto on 2006 06 24 at 10:11 PM • permalink

  8. And just at LGF now, the NY Shitrag has also released details of planned American withdrawals from a secret briefing with the general responsible, again, from unnamed sources. Time for the U.S. to get itself an Official Secrets Act.

    Posted by andycanuck on 2006 06 24 at 11:31 PM • permalink

  9. No, it is time for the people to let the New York Times know that they are acting as agents of the enemy of the citizens of the United States.  If the blogosphere has any power at all, let us see it.  There ought to be a storm unleashed against these people to remind them that they don’t run things.  Nobody voted them into office to make the critical decisions concerning the safety of the country and our citizens abroad at the behest and on orders from our representatives.  Who the hell does this sorry excuse for a man think he is?

    Posted by saltydog on 2006 06 24 at 11:54 PM • permalink

  10. What this means is he will vehemently defend his rights under the 1st Amendment to the Constitution, up to the point where his safety is threatened.
    What it all boils down to is the fact that his is sniveling, spineless pussy not unlike the overwhelming majority of the leftist community.
    They are cowards that hold no principle above their fears. To them, nothing is worth risking their life over.

    Posted by Texas Bob on 2006 06 25 at 01:36 AM • permalink

  11. O/T Can anyone remind me of what you call it when the “armed wing” of a country launches an attack on a checkpoint of another on killing people??
    http://www.abc.net.au/news/newsitems/200606/s1671317.htm

    Im pretty shure its not “Rational debate” or “holding hands and singing kumbyah”

    Posted by thefrollickingmole on 2006 06 25 at 03:21 AM • permalink

  12. Kill Bill…

    Posted by crash on 2006 06 25 at 07:58 AM • permalink

  13. #11, well, when they have to dig a tunnel and crawl under a wall in order to attack, I’m pretty sure it’s not “self-defense” either.  But that’s what the rhetoric will say:  defending the Palestinian people against Israeli aggression.

    Posted by RebeccaH on 2006 06 25 at 09:26 AM • permalink

  14. The newspaper profession, such as it was, was ruined completely by Woodward and Bernstein’s Watergate reportage.  Ever since, these newsclowns have wanted nothing more than to be able to “expose” another Watergate in government, and therefore print any damn thing, no matter how damaging to the country at large, in hopes that a big book deal can be scored and that Brad Pitt will star in the movie to be made.

    Posted by ushie on 2006 06 25 at 11:42 AM • permalink

  15. The cowardly newspapers were not supporting any basic tenet of Islam not to depict Mohammed, they were backing a new, radical Islamic agenda.
    There are many examples of Islamic art which depict the Prophet.  The radicals were also exploiting very lame and harmless depictions as if they were extreme, to intimidate Western media.
    They succeeded beyond their wildest dreams, and the pyocritical leftist media only congratulate themselves for that..

    Posted by Barrie on 2006 06 26 at 01:27 AM • permalink

  16. Page 1 of 1 pages

Commenting is not available in this weblog entry.

Members:
Login | Register | Member List

Please note: you must use a real email address to register. You will be sent an account activation email. Clicking on the url in the email will automatically activate your account. Until you do so your account will be held in the "pending" list and you won't be able to log in. All accounts that are "pending" for more than one week will be deleted.