Comment on Keller's defense of traitorous conduct

Captain's Quarters:

Bill Keller, having fled the scene according to his office as soon as the New York Times published the latest national-security revelations from Eric Lichtblau and James Risen, offers his readers a written explanation rather than give any interviews about his decision to reveal classified tactics. Unfortunately for Times readers, he doesn't offer much in the way of explanation in his open letter. Keller manages to dodge the real questions while actually blaming conservative critics for making this a bigger story than he imagined when he green-lighted it for publication.

The pushback against the right comes as his first excuse:

Some of the incoming mail quotes the angry words of conservative bloggers and TV or radio pundits who say that drawing attention to the government's anti-terror measures is unpatriotic and dangerous. (I could ask, if that's the case, why they are drawing so much attention to the story themselves by yelling about it on the airwaves and the Internet.)

One has to go far before seeing a more disingenuous argument than this from any publisher or editor. It insults the intelligence, because Keller would have you believe that a front-page story in the New York Times would never have garnered any attention had it not been for conservative bloggers and talk-show hosts. Granted, if Keller remains in charge of the Times it may eventually come to that. However, Keller's argument appears to be that criticism of publication of classified material creates a larger national-security problem than the publication itself.

He then offers the standard platitudes about the role of a free press in democracy, and the heavy responsibility that he felt in making this decision. What he doesn't explain at all is the competing interests of the public right to know and the government responsibility for security, a decision that really shouldn't rest at the Times in any case....

...

There is much more including links to other comments on this remakable letter. While Keller claims to have weighed the problems with disclosing an admittedly legal and effective program, he shows reamkable little concern for the results of that disclosure other than having to read conservative criticism of his conduct. It is as if the political fallout is the major problem he is having to deal with and the lives he has put at risk are of no concern whatsoever. As this letter from Lt. Cotton serving with his unit in Iraq demonstrates, there are real world consequences when the media help terrorist find a way to finance the explosions that are killing people in Iraq and elsewhere. Likewise the funding of explosions in Israel has to come from somewhere other than money generated in the Palestinian neighborhoods. By publishing the article the media has enabled terrorist in avoiding detection. There should be more than political consequences for such conduct and such arrogance.