NYT involved in another leak of classified info

And Gateway Pundit pegs the story accurately:

Is there anything about this memo that is so critical that it had to be leaked?
…Besides, of course, that it will undermine American efforts in Iraq?

For a different take, read Rick Moran’s post over at Red State.

My take is this: Yeah, it’s good that the Bush admin is questioning al-Maliki’s leadership abilities (or lack thereof?), but the leaking of this classified memo could have some seriously damaging consequences for our relationship with al-Maliki at a crucial time where sectarian violence is escalating in Iraq. Some things are best discussed and settled behind closed doors, and this is one of them.

Thumbs down to the NYT for deciding to once again publish classified info.

9 Responses to "NYT involved in another leak of classified info"

Phil says:

November 29, 2006 at 11:53 am

Well if the New York Times keeps this up they might find them selves banned from any kind of forum where News Personel were allowed in before. I can’t say that I would be to sad to hear that the New York Times ruined it for all the other News Organizations either.
Wake up America says:

November 29, 2006 at 12:47 pm

Treason and the New York Times

In law, treason is the crime of disloyalty to one’s nation or state. A person who betrays the nation of their citizenship and/or reneges on an oath of loyalty and in some way willfully cooperates with an enemy, is considered to be a traitor.
Amy Proctor says:

November 29, 2006 at 5:46 pm

NY Times Takes Another Leak on Iraq

While this memo is a totally legitimate critique of the Prime Minister, it must embarrass and perhaps anger the good PM. This appears to be another attempt in a string of many by the communistic New York Times to purposely thwart the Bush administr…
Drewsmom says:

November 29, 2006 at 5:49 pm

Looks like the nyslimes are just gonna keep leaking classified info and with the dems in they have no reason NOT to stop, thanks Justice Department.
Leslie says:

November 30, 2006 at 4:19 pm

Umm . . . the story was leaked to the Times by an administration official. Somebody high enough up to have seen the classified material.

That person is the culprit, not the Times.

And, since it was a senior official, maybe, just maybe, the administration wanted the thing leaked?

Hmm . . . ?
Sister Toldjah says:

November 30, 2006 at 4:32 pm

But as we’ve discussed before when talking about the other classified leaks that the NYT has published, Les, the NYT has some culpability for publishing them in the first place. I do agree, however, that the main culprit is the leaker (or shall I say “whistleblower”?
tom says:

December 1, 2006 at 4:37 am

Then why was there no comment on the administration leaker? Sounds like you’re shooting the messenger here.

Thumbs down for this leaky Administration.
Leslie says:

December 1, 2006 at 10:16 am

Sistah,

I think the whole system is rotten, but this is the way it is. When an administration source leaks a story to the Times, there’s no way they’re going to ignore it.

That’s how things work in Washington, as much as we might wish otherwise.

:(
Great White Rat says:

December 2, 2006 at 3:05 am

I’ve heard the same report as Leslie. Did anyone else get the idea that the administration might have been playing the NYT like a fiddle in order to get a point across to al-Maliki?

Here’s the scenario: the administration wants the Iraqi leader to move more decisively in building up his security forces and in taking more control over the country. The administration also knows that the NYT will always publish any classified document it gets its hands on, especially one that the NYT thinks might hurt the WOT effort. So you leak the document and wait for the Times to perform predictably. Net effect: al-Maliki gets a bit of a jolt and realizes he has to assert his leadership more or lose our support.

Kind of an unlikely scenario, granted, but the beauty of it is that it’s positively Rovian.

Comments are closed.