moonbattery.gif


« Senate Refuses to Fund Border Fence | Main | Reconquistadors Call for Disney Boycott »


July 16, 2006

Smoking Gun on Treasonous New York Times

terrorist_sniper.jpg
Original caption: A sniper loyal to Shiite cleric Moqtada al Sadr fires towards U.S. positions in the cemetery in Najaf, Iraq.

This is a picture of a terrorist lowlife preparing to kill an American soldier. It was taken by Joao Silva for the New York Times. Times Assistant Managing Editor for Photography Michele McNally provides a comment on the picture:

Right there with the Mahdi army. Incredible courage.

Of course, to a normal person, "courage" in this situation would have entailed rushing the terrorist to prevent him from getting the shot off. But on the fifth-column Left, "courage" means climbing into the sewer with the rats attempting to overrun civilization. "Courage" means standing there taking pictures as a terrorist tries to put a bullet through the brain of a fellow American who is laying his life on the line to keep you safe from that same sort of terrorist.

"Courage," in the language of the vermin at the New York Times, means cowardice, treachery, treason, and moral depravity.

Silva didn't just fail to act. He was willfully complicit in any crimes this terrorist managed to commit. For he was there to participate as a propagandist. Michelle Malkin reports that he is hawking a whole book of photographs that his coziness with American-killing terrorists has enabled him to take. They were shot while on assignment for the Times, and are promoted as illustrating "a narrative about faith, sacrifice, war and martyrdom." In other words, the book is terrorist propaganda, paid for not only by those who buy it, but by anyone who purchases the despicable publication by which Silva is employed.

That the Times would side with terrorists against fellow Americans is not surprising. This malignant institution is presided over by a squishy, larva-like creature who is quite proud of his treasonous impulses. Publisher Arthur "Pinch" Sulzberger is fond of telling the story of how he let his father Punch, from whom he inherited control of the paper, know whose side he was on in the Vietnam War. Via NRO:

Pinch was a political activist in the Sixties, and was twice arrested in anti-Vietnam protests. One day, the elder Sulzberger asked his son what Pinch calls, "the dumbest question I've ever heard in my life." If an American soldier runs into a North Vietnamese soldier, which would you like to see get shot? Young Arthur answered, "I would want to see the American get shot. It's the other guy's country." Some Sixties activists have since thought better of their early enthusiasms. Pinch hasn't.

It would be nice to think that Lucianne commenter DogRunner is correct and the Times has reached a "jump the shark" moment — a point at which the general public becomes aware that the Times is not a legitimate source of news, but simply a tool used by America's enemies to attack it from within.

But given the paper's relentless efforts to uncover and destroy covert antiterror programs, it seems likely that its regular readers are already perfectly aware whose side the Gray Lady is on in our struggle with Islamic terrorists.

Hat tip: LGF, on a tip from V the K.

pinch-sulzberger.jpg
Pinch Sulzberger: On the side of whomever's killing Americans.

Posted by Van Helsing at July 16, 2006 10:48 AM

Comments

I took part in the fighting against those people depicted in the photographs. It's a crying shame that we didn't get that turd with a hellfire shot...maybe next time.

This "gentleman" and the NYT attempting to profit off these photos is nothing more than trading off of the blood and sacrifice of the American soldiers these animals may have shed.

The NYT needs to suffer financially for this...If I personally could find a way to drive them out of business I surely would. They are weasels, whose only allegiance is to the almighty dollar and ultimately their own fame and vanity. While I will continue to protect their right to free speech...they certainly don't deserve that protection.

Posted by: Outlaw13 at July 16, 2006 11:47 AM

And your Sunday NYT editorial:

It is only now, nearly five years after Sept. 11, that the full picture of the Bush administration’s response to the terror attacks is becoming clear. Much of it, we can see now, had far less to do with fighting Osama bin Laden than with expanding presidential power.

The Kossing of the Times is complete.

Posted by: V the K at July 16, 2006 11:53 AM

Posted by: V the K at July 16, 2006 8:44 PM

What exactly defines courage in this example Mizz McNally? You freely disregard the lives of your own country's servicemen for the sake of publishing a good picture, but would you vilify them if they defended themselves and accidentally killed the human embodiment of your disregard?

Just something I'd like to know....

Posted by: Chuck at July 16, 2006 9:27 PM

Wheeee! Another chance to bash the NYT.

Forget the fact the guy who took the picture is not an American -- but a South African citizen (a neutral country in the conflict).

Forget the fact that he is not an employee of the NYT. He's a freelance journalist in business for himself.

Forget the fact that full coverage of the war is vital to a free society.

And forget the fact that this picture has wound up as helpful intel for the CIA, DIA, and local authorities in Iraq.

But you get to bash the NYTimes! Hurray!

Posted by: Ronald Reagan at July 17, 2006 9:41 AM

Junior is making excuses for those that side with the jihadists again. Color me with the "surprised" crayon.

Posted by: Jonathan L. at July 17, 2006 11:49 AM

Oh, I don't side with the jihadists -- never have, never will, Little Jonny.

Posted by: Ronald Reagan at July 17, 2006 1:35 PM

You merely APPEAR to side with the terrorists, then?

Posted by: nikko at July 17, 2006 3:31 PM

RR
"Forget the fact the guy who took the picture is not an American -- but a South African citizen (a neutral country in the conflict)."

Who the F*** cares about nationality? A human being ready to kill another human being and nothing is done by this waste of DNA! Heroic? Coward is too weak to describe this waste of human flesh.

"Forget the fact that he is not an employee of the NYT. He's a freelance journalist in business for himself."
So are Pimps. I don't respect them either.

"Forget the fact that full coverage of the war is vital to a free society."

Tell that to your Supreme Court who just overrode the Geneva Convention.

"And forget the fact that this picture has wound up as helpful intel for the CIA, DIA, and local authorities in Iraq."

How about how helpful the NYT has been to the Middle East.


Posted by: Tommyboy at July 17, 2006 5:52 PM

Great work!
[url=http://ikbwtfxb.com/gnju/zjvd.html]My homepage[/url] | [url=http://yabffmvq.com/kniu/rcuj.html]Cool site[/url]

Posted by: Simon at July 18, 2006 2:26 AM

Thank you!
My homepage | Please visit

Posted by: Shelly at July 18, 2006 2:26 AM

Thank you!
http://ikbwtfxb.com/gnju/zjvd.html | http://qnmmdlax.com/lzjs/ckkh.html

Posted by: Jason at July 18, 2006 2:27 AM

Thank you!
[url=http://duofwqyu.com/znou/qjbo.html]My homepage[/url] | [url=http://ipqkxogq.com/tgrc/tekp.html]Cool site[/url]

Posted by: Irene at July 18, 2006 10:40 PM