DISPATCHES by Hank Kalet: Attacks on the New York Times are really attacks on the First Amendment.
By: Hank Kalet
The Bush administration is tracking the financial transactions of Americans involved in international banking.
According to a story June 23 in The New York Times, the CIA is tracing transactions of people suspected of having ties to al-Qaida "by reviewing records from the nerve center of the global banking industry, a Belgian cooperative that routes about $6 trillion daily between banks, brokerages, stock exchanges and other institutions. The records mostly involve wire transfers and other methods of moving money overseas and into and out of the United States. Most routine financial transactions confined to this country are not in the database."
The program, the story said, has stirred some concerns within the administration about privacy and the potential for abuse, but appears relatively benign.
That hasn’t stopped the Bush Administration and the folks on its periphery from taking aim at the paper.
Here are some choice comments (from The New York Times):
President George W. Bush: "(W)hat we did was fully authorized under the law. And the disclosure of this program is disgraceful. We’re at war with a bunch of people who want to hurt the United States of America, and for people to leak that program, and for a newspaper to publish it, does great harm to the United States of America."
Vice President Dick Cheney: "What I find most disturbing about these stories is the fact that some of the news media take it upon themselves to disclose vital national security programs, thereby making it more difficult for us to prevent future attacks against the American people."
Treasury Secretary John Snow: The paper’s decision to print the story "was irresponsible and harmful to the security of Americans and freedom-loving people worldwide."
U.S. Rep. Peter King (R-N.Y.) went a step further, calling for U.S. Attorney General Alberto Gonzales to investigate the paper and other media outlets that reported the story.
"The activities of The New York Times are shameful and irresponsible, and put Americans all over the world at risk by identifying sources and methods and warning our adversaries of our capabilities and techniques," he wrote in a letter to the attorney general. "I implore you to investigate thoroughly any possible violations of law by The New York Times and other media outlets such as the Los Angeles Times and The Wall Street Journal and hold accountable those persons responsible for aiding the cause of our enemies."
Given the level of scorn heaped on the Times, you’d think the paper’s editors had personally handed weapons of mass destruction to al-Qaida, or unmasked a CIA agent, rather than reported a legitimate story one that had not exactly been a secret before. (The Boston Globe on Wednesday quoted Roger Cressey, a former senior White House counter-terrorism official, saying it was known and that the "The White House is overreaching" in saying that the paper committed a "crime against the war on terror.")
The political chat shows have followed suit, of course, using The New York Times story to continue pushing a narrative that equates not only press criticism of the administration, but all independent reporting, as unpatriotic and treasonous.
Katrina Vanden Heuvel, editor of The Nation magazine, says the recent criticisms are part of a "broader, undeclared war on the media intended to intimidate journalists from doing their jobs," while Dennis Persica, of The Times-Picayune in New Orleans, says this is "more than just an attack on perceived bias; this is demonization."
"Journalists have now been caricatured as a group of people who are siding with a fanatical, barbaric enemy," he wrote on the liberal Web site TomPaine.com.
It is a "jihad against newspapers," political journalist Robert Scheer writes on the Web magazine. The target, he says, is "the freedom of the press to report on … nefarious government activities."
"The argument in defense of this assault on freedom is the familiar refrain of dictators, wannabe and real, who grasp for power at the expense of democracy: We are in a war with an enemy so powerful and devious that we cannot afford the safeguard of transparent and accountable governance," Mr. Scheer writes.
The administration’s argument is a dangerous one, of course, given the important role a free and unfettered press plays in the health of our democracy.
It is no accident that, when a free press is enshrined in the First Amendment along with freedom of speech, religion, assembly and the right to petition the government. The Founding Fathers knew that a free press was essential to protect the American people against government excess and to keep it informed about what its government was up to.
For this reason, the opprobrium being heaped on The New York Times is misplaced.
Perhaps U.S. Supreme Court Justice Hugo Black put it best 35 years ago in his opinion in the Pentagon Papers case, a case in which the court upheld the right of the press to print information in the face of government opposition:
"In my view," he wrote, "far from deserving condemnation for their courageous reporting, the New York Times, the Washington Post and other newspapers should be commended for serving the purpose that the Founding Fathers saw so clearly."
Hank Kalet is managing editor of the South Brunswick Post and The Cranbury Press. E-mail him by clicking here. His weblog can be found at www.kaletblog.com.