[Thanks to Gateway Pundit]
Given their track record of reporting secrets that help no one other than our enemies and hurt no one other than our allies and ourselves, I have to ask myself why the New York Times despises America. Is it just some stereotypical liberal self-hatred?
They have done it again. They have reported a story where the only beneficiaries will be anti-American terrorists and their sympathizers. Yesterday the New York Times reported on a secret program where US Special Forces operators are training Pakistani soldiers in Pakistan.
The secret U.S. task force provides the Pakistanis with intelligence and advises them on combat tactics, but does not participate in combat itself, the Times reported, citing anonymous U.S. military officials.
On its Web site Sunday, the Times reported that the effort was larger and more ambitious than previously acknowledged, involving more than 70 U.S. advisers, including combat medics, communications experts and other specialists.
A commando unit within the Frontier Corps has used information from the Central Intelligence Agency and other sources to kill or capture as many as 60 militants in recent months, the newspaper said.
I ask you: what good comes of this? People can make the case from time to time that spilling the beans on secret programs are good, perhaps showing government doing things that the people would not condone. But that does not apply in this case or in most of the cases over the last 8 years of the New York Times printing details of top secret operations. Before now I could just blame it on their hatred for George Bush but with Their Boy in office now I have to assume that it is an even more endemic anti-Americanism at work. Following on the heels of Democrat Sen. Feinstein’s near-treasonous public admission of Pakistani-launched Predator missions, it almost seems like a concerted effort to undermine our secret cooperation with the Pakistani government.
I ask again: why would the New York Times publish this? I am looking for thoughtful perspectives on this.