The NYT Financial Spying Story Merely A BushCo Psyop Operation???

[Vinnie From Indy]

Why would anyone think that the same paper that brought us Whitewater, Judith Miller, Liz Bumiller and a host of other BS suddenly become the defender of press freedom and impartial reporting? I ain't buying it. The printing of the NYT story and the subsequent outrage could easily be a planned, manufactured series of events to accomplish a number of things for both BushCo and the NYT. The lock step attacks of the NYT by the usual suspects on the right in the media has the feel of being planned. It certainly allows the NYT to offer that they really are reporting honestly and fairly about BushCo when in fact they could have easily buried the most sinister aspects of the latest revelation about financial spying. In short, the affair could be designed to try and let the NYT salvage their tattered reputation with readers having an IQ above their shoe size. The affair benefits BushCo in that it offers them an avenue to try and criminalize the exposure of their misdeeds and crimes. The cacaphony of outraged voices on the right is clearly designed to sway Americans thinking that the press needs to be brought to heel by draconian measures including censorship and criminal prosecution. To sum up, the whole affair smells to high heaven. I do not for a minute believe the NYT has suddenly found religion and decided to report honestly after I have seen their repeated lies, misdirections and half truths all in the service of BushCo.

[acmejack]

1. I wouldn't put it past them for a second.

Not a bad theory at all Vinnie.

[Jade Fox]

2. The whole thing makes no sense to me....

The Press/Media made Bushco. Now, when their polls are in the toilet, they threaten to do something outrageous to the press just to fire up their idiot base? Or have they belatedly decided to go on the offensive over their illegal spying in general?

It seems a very stupid move to me.

[madokie]

3. I just realized this is going to be at the core of what they use

to steal another election. we have to remember there is only a few credible M$M outlets left.

[cali]

4. Here we go again.

Why would the paper that published the Pentagon Papers, numerous investigative stories into bushco policies on the environment, Veteran's care, Halliburton and much more be accused of being an apparatus of the administration? Why would the paper that prominently publishes the column of one of the most liberal economists in the country be considered right wing. This is the paper of Frank Rich, scourge of the admin, of Maureen Dowd, Nicholas Kristof, Bob Herbert, Dexter Filkins (check out his scathing story yesterday from Iraq), John Burns, Paul Risen, Edward Wong, Eric Lichtblau, Linda Greenhouse, and fucking many, many more.

What's more, I challenge you to list some of the repeated lies, misdirections and half truths that you claim they undertook in the service of bushco. This is a paper who's editorial page has done nothing but excoriate bush. I think in the almost six years of his presidency, I've seen one positive editorial and that was about moves that bushco took re the international sex trade. The opinion page has two rather tepid conservatives, Brooks and Tierney. The others are all liberals.

Yes they screwed up big time with Miller, just as they screwed up big time with Jason Blair. The Times has a tendency to be lax regarding its reporters. It pissed me off majorly. Yes they also screwed up holding the NSA story for almost a year. Its not pretty when a major paper allows itself to be intimidated by WH.

If you respond to nothing else, answer just this: Why would the people I listed above work for a paper that's in cahoots with bushco?

[Vinnie From Indy]

7. I didn't say they were FOX news

I simply offered that their NEWS reporting has been highly skewed and their decisions NOT to run stories has had a major impact in our country. In addition, the best deception and psyop campaigns are not blatant. They are subtle.

As for folks working for the NYT, I would venture the money is pretty good. Most all of the folks you mentioned are editorial writers. Did you ever wonder why the NYT would put them behind a pay wall? To me the move was an easy way to blunt their impact without losing face. It has to be a money loser for them.

So there! Put that in your pipe and smoke it!!!

[cali]

12. You accused them of

being an admin lapdog. And no, most of the people I listed are not editorial writers. You claimed their news reporting is highly skewed and produced no evidence that aside from the Judith Miller fuck up, they skew to the right or in favor of the admin. Your suggestion that the people I listed are willing to sell out, is also unsupported by those pesky little things called facts.

[blm]

8. And why did they hold back on the debate wire story?

You never answered after I posted the article from FAIR.

[burythehatchet]

10. NYT is the print version of CNN

more dangerous than FOX because believe they might be independent.

[cali]

11. That's laughable.

And could only have been written by someone who does not read the NYT. They are the ONLY paper left in this country that does real investigative journalism and that doesn't rely heavily on wire service reports for their overseas reporting. Fault them for many things, but they are a real news gathering organization.

[peacetalksforall]

5. Your scenarios fit just fine. (Fits their way of operating and conniving).

[dailykoff]

6. Everybody wins don't they?

The NYT gets its bogus journalism credentials, and BushCo gets an object lesson to skeer the crap outta anybody thinking of going off the reservation.

Like the narc who takes a phony hit to prove he's not a narc.

[sweetheart]

9. "we're watching you"

The message is loud and clear, that the warden is watching the prison,
and he's broken in to computers all over the earth to find his quarry,
surely on the threat to cut off all computer cooperation with any reissters
who might be "against us". The Psyops operation centers around the false
statement "you're either with us or against us." Who is us? Not americans,
Not republicans really as the big government stuff is just not conservative,
not christians, as anyone who walks on the paths with jesus would be with
jesus and not with a war, so who is left that is "us"? It turns out "us"
are republican radical militarists, and nobody else. Then everyone is
against "us", everyone on earth besides the neocons and their
disturbed believers is "the enemy". With a fell statement,
bush has he not put a gun to the head of a citizen, "with us or die", and
everyone coughs out the rhetoric of loyalty, and with that oath, the selling
out of the constitution to anything but. Then the oath is taken in fear,
a selling out to the lowest, fearful common bottom, of survivalist paranoia,
in a castle built of bibles, nobody can read, and all that is left is
people trying to eat bullets, their only remaining cultural valuables.