Posted by admin | Posted in Congress, mainstream media | Posted on 30-06-2006
June 30, 2006 at 7:43 am
Shhhh … don’t show this to Hugh Hewitt, you’ll just make him madder.
As you know, the House yesterday voted to condemn the news media’s disclosure of a secret program that monitors international bank transactions.
The bill, H. Res 895, angered Hugh Hewitt:
its language is the language of indecision and purposelessness. It doesn’t name the New York Times and the Los Angeles Times, so it isn’t directed at them. It is a half-measure in a time when Americans in the military are asked to give their full measure. I don’t think I could vote for it.
So, next step: Was the New York Times named during yesterday’s House floor debate? According to the Congressonal Record, only by these precious few:
Rep. Poe: ”In 1950, a law was passed making releasing such classified information a crime. If the New York Times has violated this law by becoming the Benedict Arnold press, they need to be held accountable. Not even a journalist from the Times has the right to violate the law just to get a byline.”
Rep. Price of Georgia: “Mr. Speaker, I rise today in frustration over the recent leak by the New York Times of a vital national security program. In a time of global war, this leak is a disgrace to all Americans and especially a disgrace to those risking their lives every day to keep us safe.”
Rep. Blackburn: “The New York Times, you know, the actions of that storied paper certainly are the subject of much discussion. Mr. Speaker, it is a sad discussion, because it is a discussion about those who chose to leak information and those who chose to print that leaked information that is harmful to this great Nation’s security.”
And in the other chamber, Sen. Bond: “Well, the New York Times has decided that its right to publish takes precedence over America’s right to have intelligence collection methods that are not disclosed to the people of the United States and, thus, to the terrorists we attempt to track.”