BY NOW IT'S UNDENIABLE: The New York Times is a national security threat. So drunk is it on its own power and so antagonistic to the Bush administration that it will expose every classified antiterror program it finds out about, no matter how legal the program, how carefully crafted to safeguard civil liberties, or how vital to protecting American lives.
Read the rest. Here's the original Times article entitled "Bank Data Secretly Reviewed by U.S. to Fight Terror." Let us imagine that this were World War II and the New York Times ran the headline "Communications Secretly Reviewed by Allies to Fight Nazis" (referring to the Ultra intercepts) or detailed the Normandy landings the day before the invasion, as Jay Reding has written about. The consequences of printing such a story are obvious. The Ultra program allowed the Allies to target U-boats, was distributed to field commanders like Patton to aid in the ground war, helped the British learn of invasion points of Operation Sealion, among countless other victories. None of this would have been possible if the Germans had known the Allies compromised their communications.
The same is true for the current war. Inhibiting the federal government's ability to fight this war creates a far more dangerous situation for the United States. The Times doesn't care about our national security or the public interest. To them, compromising national security is merely a way to sell more papers. The Department of Justice and the Attorney General have a duty to ensure that Bill Keller, Eric Lichtblau, James Risen, and the Times are held responsible for revealing classified information and until this is done--until journalists realize they're not above the law--no classified information is safe from publication.
UPDATE: Milblogger Sergeant T. F. Boggs writes a letter to the Times: "Thank you for continually contributing to the deaths of my fellow soldiers."