There is a big difference between "everybody knows X is doing something about Y" and "X is doing this about Y and they are using Z to do it." There is also a big difference between something mentioned in an obscure publication of small circulation and something being mentioned in one of the most influential publications in the world.
Agreed. I think Patterico crystalizes the self-contradiction in the NYT defense:
Keller tells us that, hey, the terrorists knew anyway:
But this was a case where, clearly the terrorists, or the people who finance terrorism, know quite well, because the Treasury Department and the White House have talked openly about it, that they monitor international banking transactions. It’s not news to the terrorists.
Keller, you’re a smart guy, and I know you know better than this. There is a difference between publishing a story saying “Government Monitors International Banking Transactions,” which, without detail, would be greeted by a big yawn — and publishing the story that you did publish, which exposed the classified details of how the government does this. As See Dubya has already observed, you can’t have it both ways. Either ths story revealed nothing secret and sensitive, in which case it didn’t deserve front-page coverage and the agonizing that you and Dean Baquet and Doyle McManus say you went through — or it did, in which case you can’t credibly argue that the terrorists were told nothing useful.
patterico.com |
