PLEASE REMEMBER

Subject: txt grn msm bdd -
SELECTIVE SECRECY

Here’s a dirty little secret about The New York Times. It likes to leak things. Important things. Things that change the course of the public conversation. From the Pentagon Papers to the ruined terrorist-surveillance programs of the Bush era, the Times has routinely found that secrecy is a danger and sunlight is a disinfectant. Until now.

A hacker recently released e-mails going to and from the Climate Research Unit at the University of East Anglia in Britain, e-mails that exposed how the "scientific experts" cited so often by the media on global warming display are guilty of crude political talk, attempts at censoring opponents, and twisting scientific data to support their policy agenda. But, according to the NYT;

"The documents appear to have been acquired illegally and contain all manner of private information and statements that were never intended for the public eye, so they won’t be posted here."

Funny, that rule didn’t apply to things like the disclosure of the SWIFT global bank monitoring program against terrorists - despite their grave implications to our terror-fighting efforts and national security.

No, here there is only a danger of shredding the undeserved reputation of some global-warming alarmists as partisan, ideological non-scientists pushing a preconceived environmentalist and statist agenda to everyone's detriment - but 'propriety' is now paramount... [snip]

This kind of censor-your-opponents activity ought to disgust a journalist who values openness and rigorous debate above all. Every day the networks avoid this story, they’re saying they don’t really care about either of those values.

In fact, they become willing accomplices in a coverup of global proportions.

[Again, the most pervasive spin: omission. If you're getting your news from TV, you aren't.]

READ MORE