L.A. Times: We Must Give Our Readers All the Information, Even if It Puts the Troops at Risk . . . but Not if It Hurts Our Agenda Our Endangers Our Own Lives
So the editors of the Los Angeles Times decided a few days ago to publish inflammatory photos of American soldiers with dead Afghan suicide bombers, despite the military’s deep concern that publishing the photos would put our soldiers at risk.
The fear among some officials is that the latest trophy photos will be used as an excuse for further unrest in Afghanistan, similar to what happened when previous photographs were made public.
The paper published an article explaining its decision, which linked to an online chat with the paper’s new editor:
“We considered this very carefully,” Maharaj said. “At the end of the day, our job is to publish information that our readers need to make informed decisions.”
Apparently danger to the troops was not a good enough reason not to publish inflammatory material.
What about danger to the editors themselves? Well, you see, that’s different.
Back when there was a controversy over cartoons depicting the prophet Muhammad, the paper pointedly refused to publish the cartoons that were at the center of the controversy. If the paper ever published those cartoons, I am unaware of it. Indeed, when a cartoonist drew a satirical cartoon that mocked the refusal of newspapers like the Los Angeles Times to publish the Muhammad cartoons — a cartoon that didn’t even depict Muhammad at all! — the editors pulled that cartoon as well.
So apparently, danger to the troops is not a good reason to withhold “information that [their] readers need to make informed decisions” . . . but danger to their own lives? Why, that is an excellent reason.
Indeed, the paper is willing to withhold critical information from its readers even when there is no danger to anyone. Remember the Rashid Khalidi tape, showing Obama paying tribute to a radical advocate for Palestinian rights? An article described some anti-Israel sentiments expressed at the dinner Obama attended:
“During the dinner a young Palestinian American recited a poem accusing the Israeli government of terrorism in its treatment of Palestinians and sharply criticizing U.S. support of Israel. If Palestinians cannot secure their own land, she said, “then you will never see a day of peace.”
One speaker likened “Zionist settlers on the West Bank” to Osama bin Laden, saying both had been “blinded by ideology.”
The paper refused to release that tape, saying they had promised their source they wouldn’t. Not only that, they also refused to release a transcript (which they had not promised not to do), or view the tape to tell readers whether Bill Ayers or Bernadine Dohrn appeared at the dinner — or whether the tape showed Obama’s reaction to the extreme statements above.
So don’t give us a line about how you release all important information, Mr. Maharaj. You release information that serves your agenda, whether it puts our troops at risk or not. But you keep quiet if the information would hurt Obama . . . or if it posed a risk to your editors’ precious little hides.
Thanks to dana.
Jimmy Kimmel’s best line: what’s black and white and read all over? Nothing anymore.
Ghost (ee3968) — 4/30/2012 @ 8:06 amI’m not sure I agree with you, Patterico, or the LA Times, either. I am with General Sherman. “War is barbarity, it cannot be refined”. They are barbarians, let’s show them that we can be barbarous, too.
nk (875f57) — 4/30/2012 @ 8:13 amPatterico – Once more with feeling, THAT’S DIFFERENT!
daleyrocks (bf33e9) — 4/30/2012 @ 8:15 amIf you act as a “weak horse”, you will be perceived by those you wish to pacify as a “weak horse”.
AD-RtR-OS! (b8ab92) — 4/30/2012 @ 8:51 amThe “strong horse” doesn’t need public-opinion polling to know what to do to advance his message – the Poobahs of the LAT will “take a meeting”.
You just want to smear him with Khalidi’s words.
JD (318f81) — 4/30/2012 @ 8:53 amMaybe the President can slow jam the Rashid Khalidi tape?
Oh, that’s right: he’s too white to do that without Jimmy Fallon and the Roots to service him.
Simon Jester (38ad7b) — 4/30/2012 @ 8:56 amAnd again, some Breitbart-type needs to go to the Tribune Co’s BK judge and offer $1 million for the Khalidi tape.
Kevin M (bf8ad7) — 4/30/2012 @ 9:11 amSince Khalidi is vehemently opposed to most of what the Editors and Staff of the LAT enjoy (if not believe in), it is counter-intuitive that they would embargo his words to keep the vast majority of their readers in-the-dark as to the threat to their way-of-life that he and his movement represent.
AD-RtR-OS! (b8ab92) — 4/30/2012 @ 9:15 amTrimming a tree by sawing off a branch – the branch you’re sitting on – and making the cut between yourself and the tree’s trunk, is something the Left has perfected to a high art. It seems their performance would have been more enthusiastically received as part of Ringling Bros.
The real truth is the photos themselves don’t really do anything, and the military shouldn’t buy into that
I guess it sounds like, it sounds like it should make sense. It doesn’t.
They have a massive intelligence failure, and Pakistan’s rogue military intelligence agency is supporting the terrorists.
At least one thing. Barack Obama is refusing to apologize to Pakistan. Well worrying about pictures is also a form of appeasement.
Of course these pictures are totally unnecessary, and not proper, but they don’t endanger the troops! And is the LA Times the only possible source of such pictures? Why can”t someone find old pictures on the Internet if they need some? Why can’t they just lie about other pictures, too?
The difference between the editors and the troops is that they assume troops in Afghanistan are targets of terrorists anyway.
Sammy Finkelman (0b9d16) — 4/30/2012 @ 9:29 amYou guys are so cynical !
In order to prove there was “much ado about nothing” on the Rashid Khalidi tape, the LA Times had to hide the tape.
It’s kind of like when someone is pulled over by the police, and the police officer asks if he can search the car because he smells something funny. And the driver says, “I’m not hiding anything, you can search the car—but you can’t search the glove compartment !”
See ?
Elephant Stone (0ae97d) — 4/30/2012 @ 9:36 amThat proves there’s nothing “to see” in the glove compartment !
That is the broader point, the Boys at Aapbara, funded Maulana Khalis, whose protege was Mullah
narciso (8d0f34) — 4/30/2012 @ 9:38 amOmar, and every succeeding generation, but providing more excuses for the Taliban seems to be
the point of the exercise;
No, we can never be cynical enough;
http://pjmedia.com/jchristianadams/2012/04/29/doj-employee-contempt-for-mississippi-citizens-on-facebook/
narciso (8d0f34) — 4/30/2012 @ 9:40 amGreetings:
It takes a village to hollow out a military.
And with apologies to “Ghost” at #1, Mr Kimmel should have asked, “What’s Black and White and Red all over?” The answer being our celebrity President but I guess that that would have been way too speaking truth to power.
11B40 (516c02) — 4/30/2012 @ 10:05 amI don’t know what the Times spin was on this;
http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2012/04/30/top-epa-official-resigns-after-crucify-comment/
narciso (8d0f34) — 4/30/2012 @ 10:16 amThe Rashid Khalidi tape isn’t going to change anyone’s mind. If you haven’t figured out what Obama’s Smart Diplomacy is by now, nothing is going to make a difference.
AZ Bob (7d2a2c) — 4/30/2012 @ 11:03 amSo, why don’t a few members of the VRWC get together and publish select quotes from “the Khalidi tapes.” Maybe Clifford Irving could help. Apparently the Times is “honor”-bound to confidentiality, so they could hardly refute it.
Kevin M (bf8ad7) — 4/30/2012 @ 11:09 amsuggestion for a new LA Times motto:
“All the lies that are fit to print.”
i look forward with unrestrained glee to the day they go bankrupt and have to cease operations.
redc1c4 (403dff) — 4/30/2012 @ 11:27 amAt the Dog Trainer, “take your scooter to work day” means you’re carpooling with a juice-box journalist.
Icy (0c68d7) — 4/30/2012 @ 11:28 am“It was kind of like how the Romans used to, you know, conquer villages in the Mediterranean,” he said. “They’d go in to a little Turkish town somewhere, they’d find the first five guys they saw, and they’d crucify them.
“And then, you know, that town was really easy to manage for the next few years,” he said.
a
http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2012/04/30/top-epa-official-resigns-after-crucify-comment/#ixzz1tY9e9sBJ
Sounds like what Pancho Villa used to do. Not sure the Romans did that though. During World War I, the germans called this idea “shreklichkeit.”
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Schrecklichkeit
During World War II, murder was often a end in itself, not a means.
Sammy Finkelman (d22d64) — 4/30/2012 @ 11:33 amI think that’s where the word, ‘decimate’ comes from.
narciso (8d0f34) — 4/30/2012 @ 11:46 am11b40,
“whether you’re black like the president, white like the president, red like the president’s agenda, or orange like John Boehner…” He did that joke, too.
Ghost (988839) — 4/30/2012 @ 12:39 pmCircling the plug-hole
mojo (8096f2) — 4/30/2012 @ 12:41 pm“I think that’s where the word, ‘decimate’ comes from.
Comment by narciso — 4/30/2012 @ 11:46 a”
That comes from a practice of the French military, after the mutinies in 1918, to shoot every tenth soldier from that unit that mutinied.
“Pour encourager les autres “
Mike K (326cba) — 4/30/2012 @ 1:24 pmhttp://newsbusters.org/blogs/tim-graham/2012/04/30/washpost-writes-public-be-damned-theyre-biased-if-they-think-were-biased
narciso (8d0f34) — 4/30/2012 @ 1:33 pmMike K #23 and narciso #20 – decimate was an Ancient Roman military practice whereby, when a Legion had committed a sufficiently grave offence, the entire Legion would be lined up, and then every tenth person in that Legion would be slaughtered … French authorities may have taken up the practice, for similar reasons, but the origin of “to decimate” goes back to the time of the Caesars (and beyond) …
The current usage, as meaning the almost-wiping-out is a relatively new and modern misunderstanding …
Alasdair (e7cb73) — 4/30/2012 @ 1:45 pm“But you keep quiet if the information would hurt Obama”
We Knew That
glenn (877ee1) — 4/30/2012 @ 1:56 pmBonb Woodward stole a tape from Ben Bradlee of a 1990 interview for a book where Bradlee had said
http://nymag.com/news/features/ben-bradlee-2012-5/
“You know I have a little problem with Deep Throat..Did that potted [plant] incident ever happen? … and meeting in some garage. One meeting in the garage? Fifty meetings in the garage? I don’t know how many meetings in the garage … There’s a residual dual fear in my soul that that isn’t quite straight.
More:
http://nymag.com/daily/intel/2012/04/woodward-bradlee-new-york-himmelman.html
http://abcnews.go.com/blogs/politics/2012/04/ben-bradlee-has-deep-throat-doubts-in-new-book/
Bob Woodward sems very worried over nothing. The problem must be taht the man known as Deep throat wasn’t really his source.
By the way Ben Bradlee oince said taht if you put all the clues togetehr you might figure thinbgs out. Well, the clues actually eliminate Mark Felt.
I thought for a long time that a lot of the information Bob Woodward got came from John Dean. (but he pretended it camwe from David Gergen)
It’s got to be something like that to worry Woodward so much.
Sammy Finkelman (d22d64) — 4/30/2012 @ 2:16 pmSorry italics contionued too much.
You see, I think John Dean was trying to make Spiro Agnew president.
He also had to make sure the Plumbers got caught before they planted a biug in the McGovern campaign headquarters, so he sent them into the DNC. The double agent in the McGovern camoaign headquarters that Bob Bennett (later Senator from Utah) was running (Tom Gregory) was running out of excuses not to plant a bug and Liddy was about to arrange to have one put in himself.
Sammy Finkelman (d22d64) — 4/30/2012 @ 2:19 pmDon’t credit Dean with that much sagacity, he was an apparatchik like any other, who got the cushy job of being Colson’s assistant, and he promptly
narciso (8d0f34) — 4/30/2012 @ 2:26 pmflubbed it.
“…the entire Legion would be lined up, and then every tenth person in that Legion would be slaughtered…”
By THE OTHER members of the legion. Refuse, and you all die.
mojo (8096f2) — 4/30/2012 @ 2:35 pmNot getting the point is a job requirement at the Atlantic;
http://news.yahoo.com/ex-cia-interrogator-obamas-war-terror-less-ethical-134551480.html
narciso (8d0f34) — 4/30/2012 @ 2:58 pmThe Liberal media have something much worse to answer for than political bias. All sources of news are biased; how else? They are written by humans, and necessarily limited as to how much information they can impart. They will make choices, and absent Seraphic information about what is Truth, and what is important, they will make choices based on their own perceptions.
But the Liberal media twits are the ones that sold us all on the “unbiased media” nonsense. Further, they got so used to having the field largely to themselves that they have forgotten how to play the game effectively against real opposition. And while they were largely unchallenged, they forgot their duty to write well. The Liberal media aren’t losing share because they are biased. They are losing share because they are stupidly biased, smug, condescending, and bad storytellers.
I love to read the opinion columns of H.L. Mencken. I frequently don’t agree with what he said (he was a little late in realizing that a certain Austrian corporal was an unmitigated swine, for example) but the man could WRITE! Even when I think he’s 180 degrees off of true, it’s worth reading what he had to say, because he said it so well.
If the NY Times had even ONE writer of that calibre, I would be a subscriber even now.
C. S. P. Schofield (df34af) — 4/30/2012 @ 3:27 pmSo CSP, you don’t mind swallowing a bunch of bilge as long as it tastes good?
peedoffamerican (ee1de0) — 4/30/2012 @ 3:32 pmdamn… those jug ears make
Colonel Haiku (4ad427) — 4/30/2012 @ 3:38 pmyou want to hold President
like a Stanley Cup
Dang! at long last, my prayers are answered!
http://i.dailymail.co.uk/i/pix/2012/04/30/article-2137302-12D5E5BE000005DC-901_308x329.jpg
Colonel Haiku (4ad427) — 4/30/2012 @ 3:41 pmteh “Sofa on Wheels”… oh, what a feeling, Toyota!
Colonel Haiku (4ad427) — 4/30/2012 @ 3:42 pmTypo
Or not Our (in headline)
Pasha (7f26a5) — 4/30/2012 @ 3:50 pmComment by Colonel Haiku — 4/30/2012 @ 3:38 pm
damn… those jug ears make
you want to hold President
like a Stanley Cup
One of Barack Obama’s favorite four presidents (whose election victory inspires him) once did this:
http://www.lbjlib.utexas.edu/johnson/archives.hom/faqs/dog/doghouse.asp
President Johnson caused a storm of protest
when he lifted “Him” by his ears.
(typo on webpage corrected)
Sammy Finkelman (728434) — 4/30/2012 @ 4:07 pmSammy… I am old enough to remember Lyndon “In-Seam” Johnson doing that very thing.
Colonel Haiku (4ad427) — 4/30/2012 @ 4:19 pmTommy Flanaygan
says prez lying to win votes
pathological
http://www.wnd.com/2012/04/democrat-comic-scorches-obama-again/
Colonel Haiku (4ad427) — 4/30/2012 @ 4:31 pmI think Milhouse is the fellow who believes he has all “the facts” regarding Dick Nixon’s criminal behavior vis-a-vis Watergate, so this one may give him pause…
http://www.commentarymagazine.com/2012/04/30/ben-bradlee-and-watergate/
Colonel Haiku (4ad427) — 4/30/2012 @ 4:44 pmspeaking of criminal journalists…
Colonel Haiku (4ad427) — 4/30/2012 @ 4:45 pm“We considered this very carefully,” Maharaj said. “At the end of the day, our job is to publish information that our readers need to make informed decisions.”
This must have been why they published 24,000 Sarah Palin’s emails. We must be informed of the evil that lurks or something like that….
Dana (4eca6e) — 4/30/2012 @ 5:14 pmHer evil, like the Canadian Menace, is subtle and ruthless, Dana,
narciso (8d0f34) — 4/30/2012 @ 5:20 pm_______________________________________________
“At the end of the day, our job is to publish information that our readers need to make informed decisions.”
The claim made by newspapers like the LA Times that information must be published because the public has a right to know has been rendered pretty much worthless and turned into a running joke for quite awhile. The reason? Such publications on a regular basis have been purposefully leaving out basic details — namely race or ethnicity — of the description of a suspect in a crime story.
Mark (411533) — 4/30/2012 @ 10:25 pmValuable information. Fortunate me I discovered your site accidentally, and I am surprised why this coincidence didn’t came about earlier! I bookmarked it.
epic orchestral composer (7b3c97) — 4/30/2012 @ 10:36 pm______________________________________________
i look forward with unrestrained glee to the day they go bankrupt and have to cease operations.
Regrettably, there probably will always be enough of a pulse to keep such publications alive. After all, there are rather obscure, specialty magazines (such as the National Review on the right, Mother Jones on the left) that have never contained much advertising since Day One, yet somehow manage to hang on year after year.
As for another notorious newspaper in the US, I was leafing through a copy of the Sunday New York Times yesterday and was surprised to see how little advertising it contained, particularly in its well-known Sunday magazine. I recall when that section not only was stuffed with pages, but far more of those pages were devoted to advertising. The LA Times magazine never had much ad support to begin with, so nowadays they must be super close to ending up kaput—even with the savings from a print schedule that has since become sporadic and non-regular.
Mark (411533) — 4/30/2012 @ 10:42 pmNew Nadia Naffe post is up and she talks about P.
nadianaffe.com
Noodles (3681c4) — 4/30/2012 @ 11:55 pmI wish someone was here to see if I am reading this right! lol
Noodles (3681c4) — 5/1/2012 @ 12:41 amit’s easy to talk guavno, but somehow i doubt she has anything to back it up but more hot air…
as for the house, $1.3mil in RPV likely means they rent someone’s garden shed. 8)
redc1c4 (403dff) — 5/1/2012 @ 2:12 amDang, but the lady has issues. I need to drink three bottles of homemade grappa to get that nuts. Which makes me envy her in a way.
nk (875f57) — 5/1/2012 @ 2:19 ami see the spam-bots are up early/out late…
hard to believe anyone still uses AOL though.
redc1c4 (403dff) — 5/1/2012 @ 2:46 ami just tried to post a comment at Nada Naif’s place…but it didn’t take. 8)
kinda makes you wonder what she’s afraid of.
redc1c4 (403dff) — 5/1/2012 @ 3:24 amShe is kind of crazy. And her new accusations and illogic track with similar asshattery from her new buddies.
JD (2585aa) — 5/1/2012 @ 5:41 amShe and Frum should get together, you know he has an acknowledged piece of fiction out.
narciso (8d0f34) — 5/1/2012 @ 5:43 amComment by Noodles — 4/30/2012 @ 11:55 pm
New Nadia Naffe post is up and she talks about P.
nadianaffe.com
Comment by Noodles — 5/1/2012 @ 12:41 am
I wish someone was here to see if I am reading this right! lol
I somehow missed the blog post that contained her Social Security number and medical records.
By the way, if you want to get an overview of her (or anybody else’s) weets, go to twtrland.com
http://twtrland.com/profile/nadianaffe
She has said:
O’Keefe downloaded his emails onto my computer himself, when we were together in NYC Sept. 2011. Any other suggestion is patently false.
Another tweet:
Okay, guys. I get it, now. The $3k a year figure for #BirthControl was highly inflated. I don’t use the stuff, thus I am totally ignorant.
One of her famous words:
I still dont know the identity of the man O’keefe brought with him to the barn that night, to intimidate or worse, assault me @DavidShuster
Sammy Finkelman (114781) — 5/1/2012 @ 7:56 am8 RTs ~ 2 months ago
Oh yeah? Where’s that Rashad Khalidi tape that they promised?
mcnorman (b9bf3b) — 5/1/2012 @ 9:57 amOkay, so did anyone read the legal docs @ Nadia’s site?
Who runs the account now?
Noodles (3681c4) — 5/1/2012 @ 10:28 amNoodles – she has joined forces, completely, with those that have caused harm to our host.
JD (318f81) — 5/1/2012 @ 10:32 amYeah, funny how that works. You would think a blog post criticizing another blog post would post a link. Especially when the content of the latter was the entire basis of the complaint.
For some reason, Nadia doesn’t want to do that. I believe it’s this and this.
Pat also discussed Nadia here and here.
I believe this is regarding the first of those links.
She doesn’t make clear what medical records she’s referring to. I think by medical records she means court records that discuss Nadia’s testimony where Nadia talks about medicine she’s taking. They mean a folder from a doctor’s office. They mean a public record where this information was publicly disclosed and we all are entitled to know about it.
When you testify to something in court, other people have a right to know about it. It is not harassment to quote your testimony.
And a court document, a public record, also had Nadia’s SSN in it. You won’t find that by reading any of those links above because Patterico replaced the court document with the SSN with a copy that censored that information. P did this for Nadia’s benefit. You can tell because he did so discretely. You can tell because he did so as soon as he was aware of the issue.
This is not anything like Nadia’s summary that this was harassment and trying to shut her up. And her reaction mirror her other attempts to silence Patterico.
Another party (Ron Brynaert) did not behave discretely regarding this SSN. He’s been broadcasting loudly that the SSN was in that document. He’s been doing so long after the SSN was removed. If any identity thieves found this information about Nadia, they didn’t it find it because of Pat. No one was calling attention to it here, and it was removed as soon as it was noticed.
If anyone found it, they found it because of the broadcasting indiscreetly that it’s in that public document. And I suppose because that public document had that information in it (which I think is not necessary). Has Nadia done anything to ensure that this information is taken from that record, or this record is sealed?
I don’t think she has. I think instead she is using this as another excuse to silence someone she has a pattern of trying to silence.
A few examples showing Ron’s incredible malice towards Patrick and his wife.
This degree of hatred and motive to harm has never made sense to me. Why does Ron want to harm Pat and his wife so much? I don’t think I’ve ever been that angry with anyone in my entire life. If anything happened to these people, Ron should be the first suspect even before *damning evidence* appears.
I can also tell you that every time I’ve noted Ron’s threats at @qritiq’s blog (the above three links) and called it a threat, she censored my comments and accused me of libeling poor Ron with accurate quotes of his comments.
The last time I bothered to read that blog, I noticed that my comments were being snipped so that it appeared I was only commenting on minor things in response to outright smears. Very deceitful. So there is no point in a discussion there other than to promote dishonest narratives. I’m not surprised Red can’t even get his comment posted at Nadia’s site. They are all following a playbook. They smear, they harass, they censor. Then they accuse you of trying to silence them when you merely explain what they are doing.
Speaking of which: Nadia’s lawfare reminds me a bit of Qritiq’s behavior, too. When I disagreed with her defense of Brett Kimberlin (check the link), and explained the playbook I believe they are following, she used a legalistic and stupid argument, which Pat thankfully rejected, about how I must abide by the terms of her blog if I quote her. The only reason I do not name this person is because I have no idea what her name is. She’s tweeted me from an account with a full name, but these people lie about everything else. I don’t trust anything they say.
I think JD is 100% right that Nadia is in league with these evil people.
But read the posts she’s complaining about for yourself and see if she’s being fair.
Dustin (330eed) — 5/1/2012 @ 11:52 am“They mean a folder from a doctor’s office.”
I meant to say they *don’t* mean a folder from a doctor’s office. They mean a publicly available record.
But the way it’s described is meant to deceptively suggest something confidential was posted.
It’s like if an accurate transcript of a conversation showed I had a sprained ankle, and JD commented that he hoped it healed quickly. Doing that is not posting my medical records.
Dustin (330eed) — 5/1/2012 @ 11:55 am