« Who's the "dumb f***" now? | Main | So, what does a "peace activist" do when with friends? »
September 12, 2006
And they wonder why Americans hate the press
ABC news has posted an article on its website, proudly proclaiming, "Exclusive: New U.S. Government Videotape Simulates Terrorist Attacks."
The article describes various countermeasures being tested to protect U.S. embassies, and presumably, any other American buildings thought to be targeted by terrorists. Not content to provide these details, the network kindly provides links to videos of the various devices being tested, complete with test dummies showing the relative effectiveness of each in frustrating the aims of the would-be bomber.
Under what theory of journalism does this constitute news? What "right" do the people have to know about these efforts? How does revealing them -- with videos -- to the entire world help make us safer?
Or are we to believe that our enemies don't read, don't surf the web?
Honestly, as the Catholic chaplain I knew in college used to say, "Jesus wept."
The only thing that can happen as a result of the publication of this story is that our enemies can more quickly implement measures to defeat the technologies touted on the ABC networks.
Do they understand that stories like this get Americans killed? Do they even care?
Let me play a thought experiment with you.
WASHINGTON, D.C., January 6 -- The Columbia Broadcasting Company has obtained films and documents from the War Department, detailing the latest scientific advances designed to protect American convoys from enemy attack, inventions that perhaps might even have prevented last month's attack on Pearl Harbor
Called "Sonar" and "Radar," they use invisible electromagnetic waves to detect unseen submarines and aircraft, allowing ships to locate and destroy the approaching vessels before they can wreak havoc on the transports carrying war materiel to the British.
The New York Times, in cooperation with "News of the World" newsreels, will present never-before-seen test footage of these new technologies before the screening of all movies playing in New York, Los Angeles and Chicago.
Publisher Arthur Sulzberger said in a statement, "Some have complained that this story will only help the Nazis in their fight against America. To this I say, 'Nonsense!' The journalist belongs to no nation; he owes allegiance to the truth, and the American people are stronger when they know what their government does."
Laughable, right? Wouldn't happen in a million years.
Maybe sixty or sixty-five years, but not in a million.
Can anyone tell me that these kind of stories serve any purpose other than to inflate the egos of the journalists? And undermine the efforts to protect our people, even before these technologies reach the field?
We're doomed, and the press is doing their best to speed the process. The First Amendment is under attack? Look in the mirror, Mr. Network correspondent. The enemy of your First Amendment protections is staring you in the face.
Posted by Mike Lief at September 12, 2006 06:20 PM
| TrackBack