Calls Continue for Feds to Take Legal Action Against New York Times
by Bill Fancher and Jody Brown
June 29, 2006
(AgapePress) - - Despite two months of pleading from the White House and members of Congress, the New York Times recently published a story detailing how the federal government was tracking the financial transactions of terrorists. Some are asking why the Times is not being prosecuted for it decision to divulge the information, thus aiding terrorists.In the article, the NYT disclosed the confidential method through which the U.S. government tracked and monitored terrorist money dealings. President Bush has labeled as "disgraceful" the newspaper's decision to run the story, and said it "does great harm" for information to be leaked and/or published about the surveillance program. The Hill reported on Wednesday that GOP leaders in the House were considering introducing a resolution condemning the paper for publishing the story -- and that one Republican member, working independently, was trying to rally support for revocation of the newspaper's congressional press credentials.
Cliff Kincaid of Accuracy in Media (AIM) says he was stunned by the newspaper's report. "The New York Times has decided that they have the right to decide what should be classified and what should not be classified," he observes. "They have put themselves up above the government of the United States and the people who elect that government." And the Times' arrogant attitude -- "freedom of the press but without responsibility" -- has made America less safe, he adds.
For that reason, Kincaid wants to know why the newspaper is not being prosecuted. "Section 798 of the Espionage Act absolutely prohibits the publication of classified information dealing with the communications intelligence activities of the United States government," he says. "This is an open-and-shut case."
In addition, Kincaid says he his not happy with the way the White House has handled the disclosure. "The administration seems to have given up any hope of prosecuting the Times, and now wants to spin these stories in a way that makes the administration look good," the AIM spokesman says, pointing out that the administration actually worked with the Times before the story was published.
"They claim that they're only trying to make sure that the story is correct," he says. "But that suggests to me that they've given up any hope of trying to block these stories and prosecute the New York Times."
According to Kincaid, instead of surrendering and reflecting a "fear of the media," a better approach would be to "maintain a no-comment" and do everything legally possible to prosecute these news organizations.
A Soldier's Perspective
Gary Bauer of Campaign for Working Families says at the very least, the Justice Department ought to determine who in government leaked the sensitive information in the first place, and then prosecute them. In his "End of Day" report yesterday (June 28), Bauer shared pertinent excerpts from a letter written by a U.S. infantry officer to the New York Times about its reporting on the surveillance program.
According to Bauer's report, Lt. Tom Cotton -- who is currently serving in Iraq -- feels strongly that Times officials should be prosecuted to the fullest extent of the law. Bauer quotes from Cotton's letter:
"You may think you have done a public service, but you have gravely endangered the lives of my soldiers and all other soldiers and innocent Iraqis here," he writes. "Next time I hear [or feel an explosion] ... I will wonder whether we could have stopped that bomb had you not instructed terrorists how to evade our financial surveillance."
After delineating his legal credentials prior to joining the military, the Harvard Law graduate-turned-infantry officer offers these words: "I am well-versed in the espionage laws relevant to this story and others -- laws you have plainly violated. I hope that my colleagues at the Department of Justice match the courage of my soldiers here and prosecute you and your newspaper to the fullest extent of the law.
"By the time we return home, maybe you will be in your rightful place: not at the Pulitzer announcements, but behind bars."
