NY Times Exposed

[megiloth.livejournal.com]

Just when you thought the New York Times has only recently let out vital secrets...here are a couple lesser known and forgotten examples...

Comments

[stupiddumbpanda.livejournal.com]

I love the second one, but the big red text explanation bugs me.

[megiloth.livejournal.com]

I realize such boldness is necessary to exaggerate the point, but it is a tad overbearing.

[lafinjack.livejournal.com]

[megiloth.livejournal.com]

-

Stupid fancy icon selection thingy.

[lafinjack.livejournal.com]

[hippopotassium.livejournal.com]

While I disagree, I had to lol at "Benedict Lichtblau".

[megiloth.livejournal.com]

Benedict anything...always funny

[temujin9.livejournal.com]

Those rotten bastards, posting info anybody with the same legal status as a reporter (ie - US citizen) could have gotten, publicly.

Microsoft and countless other software companies have proven that security by obscurity works just great. Why not extend that to American national security? All it would take would be scuttling the First Amendment; a small price to pay, for true safety.

Here's American Gladiator. Here's fifty channels of it. Go back to bed, America. - Bill Hicks

[megiloth.livejournal.com]

Y'know, we could be really super safe if all our national security measures were made known to the general public and terrorist organizations abroad. Do we think we're any better than them? If it's good enough for the top levels of government to know, the public at large should be made aware of it.

Power to the people!

[temujin9.livejournal.com]

The problems with our national security measures are obvious to anybody who cares to do as much investigation as the reporters did. Which excludes the vast majority of Americans . . . but no terrorists organizations that I can think of.

Case in point: the undocumented vulnerability that a plane full of fuel without proper security measures posed, several years back.

Let me repeat myself, lest I be misunderstood: security by obscurity does not work. It only prevents the vulnerable from knowing their plight, and thus having any hope of changing it.

[readwriteblue.livejournal.com]

Excellent post especially since Monday was Patriots' Day.
But it has always been this way. If I may add three Quotes,

I hate newspapermen. They come into camp and pick up their camp rumors and print them as facts. I regard them as spies, which, in truth, they are.

If I had my choice I would kill every reporter in the world, but I am sure we would be getting reports from Hell before breakfast.

I think I understand what military fame is; to be killed on the field of battle and have your name misspelled in the newspapers.
William Tecumseh Sherman

[megiloth.livejournal.com]

I never heard of Patriot's Day until now...probably since it's a Massachusetts thing, which I discovered from my pal Wikipedia. However, I always celebrate Patriot's Day in my own way by quaffing down a fine Samuel Adams Boston Lager :)

[readwriteblue.livejournal.com]

Please pardon my parochialism; I assumed that because of the Boston Marathon everyone would know. So I guess those invites to my Evacuation Day Pahty (”http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Evacuation_Day_%28Massachusetts%29”) should have included the date along with the starting time. Pahk the cah in Hahvahd Yahd.

/humor

[kip-w.livejournal.com]

A good way to separate quotes from your regular text is to use italics. Pretend the square brackets are angle brackets. [i]Italicized text[/i]

There's also blockquote.[blockquote]War is hell.[/blockquote]Back to regular (see below for what you get with this).

There's also blockquote.

War is hell.

Back to regular. Glad to help. Five cents, please.

[megiloth.livejournal.com]

Glad to help. Five cents, please.

How aboot a freshly baked cookie?

Is it Ok when the President does it?

[tantra-cat.livejournal.com]

Paul Rieckhoff (founder of Iraq & Afghanistan Veterans of America) on Countdown last Friday, also cited in April 21 Crooks and Liars website post:


"One of the things that did happen today that concerned me was that during Bush's press conference he actually showed a graphic that showed 24 urban military outposts in downtown Baghdad. I would argue that showing that to the world and potentially to our enemy might compromise moral - might actually compromise operational security."

"Our enemies aren't stupid. They can look at that and figure out a grid coordinate and try and drop mortars on those exact locations. I mean, this is like a Geraldo moment during the invasion when Geraldo started drawing troop operation movements in the sand. I mean, this is unprecedented in my experience and maybe I'm missing something, but this is a real worry and I wouldn't go throwing this out on the airwaves for everybody to see if I were the President."

Re: Is it Ok when the President does it?

[megiloth.livejournal.com]

I would argue that showing that to the world and potentially to our enemy might compromise...

I admit that I don't watch that weasel Olberman's show, so I don't know the context. I suppose my argument is that if the outposts are in downtown Baghdad, the bad guys probably already know where they are. Also, I kind of doubt that the Commander in Chief in conjunction with the high-ranking military officials would put up sensitive information for all the world to see.

In the case of Geraldo, that was pretty dumb. But we were involved in the beginnings of a war, so anything he said or drew in the sand at least told people where we were and where we were going.

Re: Is it Ok when the President does it?

[tbonestg.livejournal.com]

So the Iraqis don't know that American forces in Baghdad? They don't know where our outposts are?

Are you suggesting that the reason American soldiers have to wear a flak jacket and Kevlar every time they step outside is because the President gave the game away?

What do you want him to do, deny any American involvement in Iraq? Wave his hand and say "These aren't the troops you're looking for..."?

[freemyn.livejournal.com]

I really don't understand, is the NY times responsible for the Germans finding ANNE FRANK? How did the NY times know who she was till her diary was found? what the hell.. i don't get this post.

[gpeefalt.livejournal.com]

They are both BS... i.e. The New York Times didn't exist until 1851.

[megiloth.livejournal.com]

It is a difficult cartoon to comprehend. Just stew aboot it and it will makes sense then, eh?

[squidb0i.livejournal.com]

*YAWN*

[anightwlkr.livejournal.com]

Funny.

[jjthefourth.livejournal.com]

It's horrible that I laughed so hard at it, but that second one is just funny as hell.