Neocons Accuse “Liberal” New York Times of Treason

Kurt Nimmo
Jun. 27, 2006

Michelle Malkin, neocon blogger and concentration camp advocate, has posted a spate of converted WWII posters on her site, taking the New York Times to task for reporting the news, albeit a year late.

According to Malkin and New York representative Peter King, the New York Times stands accused of treason “for reporting last week about a secret financial-monitoring program used to trace alleged terrorists” and disclosing “a secret domestic wiretapping program,” according to CBC News, never mind both programs violate the spirit and the letter of the Constitution. “No one elected The New York Times to do anything,” King told the New York Daily News. “They’re breaking the law to satisfy their own arrogant, liberal agenda.”

In Bushzarro world, newspapers are “elected” to report the news. If newspapers report the trashing of the Constitution, this is treason. In Malkin’s world, it follows that traitors should be thrown in concentration camps, especially if they resemble in any way Arabs or Muslims.

It would seem Mr. King and Malkin suffer from memory loss. It was Judith Miller’s “arrogant, liberal agenda” that brought us the neocon lies about illusory Iraqi weapons of mass destruction. As Antony Loewenstein writes for the Sydney Morning Herald, the “vast majority of [Miller’s] WMD claims came through Ahmed Chalabi, an indicted fraudster and one of the leading figures in the Iraqi National Congress (INC), the group keen to militarily overthrow Saddam. Miller relied on untested defectors’ testimonies (usually provided by Chalabi) to write several front-page stories on this information,” stories that did not pass the smell test at the time and have found the memory hole since.

Ahmed Chalabi, convicted bank fraudster installed as a deputy prime minister in Iraq, was a neocon darling. His Iraqi National Congress, created by the CIA, was the primary source of Judith Miller’s “journalism.” In short, Judith Miller was a hack for the neocons, thus making the New York Times a neocon conduit for lies and propaganda.

Even though the New York Times serves as a shameless shill for the “arrogant, liberal agenda” of the neocons, this does not change the fact the newspaper is protected under both the First Amendment and statutory procedure (see the Supreme Court case, Bartnicki v. Vopper). In 1971, the Supreme Court ruled in a per curiam decision that prior restraint (censorship) was not warranted in a government effort to stop the New York Times from publishing the Pentagon Papers. “There’s a tone of gleeful relish in the way they [the Bush neocons] talk about dragging reporters before grand juries, their appetite for withholding information, and the hints that reporters who look too hard into the public’s business risk being branded traitors,” Bill Keller, New York Times Executive Editor, told the Washington Post.

King and Malkin, of course, have nothing but contempt for Supreme Court rulings. It is irrelevant that NSA whistleblower Russell Tice (the source behind revelations published in the New York Times) is protected by federal law. King and Malkin believe the unitary decider and his Machiavellian operatives have the right to look through your financial, medical, and library records, listen in on your telephone calls, read your email, and sneak and peek your computer hard drive and while they’re at it rifle through your underwear drawer because “we are at war” with an enemy never sufficiently documented or designated, an enemy who worked for the CIA in Afghanistan and is not specifically “wanted in connection” with the nine eleven attacks, as his FBI wanted poster reveals.

Obviously, King and Malkin, and the whole of the neocon choir, believe the phony “war on terror,” rechristened the “long war”—i.e., it will last a century or more, or long enough to provide obscene profits for the death merchants—gives the “permanent revolution” Jacobins the right to trash the Constitution.

Quite naturally, this brings to mind Hitler’s Ermächtigungsgesetz, or Enabling Act, an element of the Reichstag Fire Decree nullifying the civil liberties of German citizens after the Reichstag was torched (a fire planned by Goebbels and executed by Göring, according to SA man Karl Ernst).

Bush, not unlike Hitler, feels he has the authority to by-pass Congress (mostly corporate purchased whores, so this is a moot point) and use the Constitution as a doormat where the unitary decider wipes off his shoes, mucky with the blood a few hundred thousand Iraqis.