FP Says the New York Times Aided the Enemy

by Kevin Jon Heller

Here is a paragraph you don’t often see in the mainstream American media:

The conviction of Manning, in other words, would also be a conviction of Bill Keller. Most importantly, if Manning is found guilty on the charge of aiding the enemy, it would strike a deep blow at the stated reason for the New York Times‘ existence. From the beginning, it was supposed to be a force for good, standing up for the little guy in the face of immense state power and terror. A court ruling that claims to prove that the New York Times in the pursuit of that goal in fact ended up aiding al Qaeda would hand a huge rhetorical victory to the Times‘ opponents.

Actually, you still haven’t seen that paragraph. The original, written by Elias Groll for FP.com, predictably mentions Julian Assange and WikiLeaks instead of Bill Keller and the New York Times. The author’s selective memory, however, is not surprising — it’s clear that the mainstream American media has collectively decided to pretend the New York Times did not publish documents leaked by Manning just as enthusiastically as WikiLeaks.

But it did. So if WikiLeaks “aided al Qaeda” by publishing leaked Manning documents (which nothing in Manning’s court-martial indicates, but whatever), the New York Times also aided al Qaeda. And if a Manning conviction means a WikiLeaks conviction, it means a Keller conviction, as well.

Just don’t lose any sleep waiting for the mainstream American media to note that fact.


4 Responses

  1. Response…Very interesting post.  I was not aware of this situation but it is very disturbing.

  2. One more example of a kind of implicit bias that pervades the national security reporting space as it currently stands. it is because the New York Times is a mover and shaker in collectIve American unconscience that can not per talked about as a target. These prosecutions are about cowering the press. Manning is just a useful pawn in that structural power battle between thbe political branches and the 4th estate. We are to like our press as rich with access and timid.

  3. Surely it would depend on what information was revealed by the NY Times, as compared to the information revealed by Wikileaks?
    Wikileaks revealed the names of Afghans credited with handing intelligence over to US forces. Their villages were identified, and in certain cases their surnames as well. 

  4. That is not the government’s position. It’s position is that, because documents can only be classified if they are potentially harmful to national security, the release of any classified document could aid the enemy. So the NYT is as “guilty” of aiding the enemy as WikiLeaks.

Trackbacks and Pingbacks

  1. There are no trackbacks or pingbacks associated with this post at this time.