Just listening to Bill Kristol on Fox News saying AG Gonzales should consider prosecuting the NYT for running the SWIFT network monitoring story. But - didn't Mr. Kristol's magazine publish classified information just a few years ago leaked to it during the height of the Iraq war? I believe it did. As Mr. Kristol's magazine brags below, it published excerpts from a top secret intelligence document:

OSAMA BIN LADEN and Saddam Hussein had an operational relationship from the early 1990s to 2003 that involved training in explosives and weapons of mass destruction, logistical support for terrorist attacks, al Qaeda training camps and safe haven in Iraq, and Iraqi financial support for al Qaeda--perhaps even for Mohamed Atta--according to a top secret U.S. government memorandum obtained by THE WEEKLY STANDARD.

The memo, dated October 27, 2003, was sent from Undersecretary of Defense for Policy Douglas J. Feith to Senators Pat Roberts and Jay Rockefeller, the chairman and vice chairman of the Senate Intelligence Committee....

So does Mr. Kristol as Keller's editorial counterpart deserve to be prosecuted as well by Mr. Gonzales? Why does he think he has the authority to make that decision to publish top secret intelligence information in his magazine, while, as he is saying now on Fox, the NYT's Bill Keller does not? Does Kristol think it should be left to his editorial discretion? Does he think that what he published served a higher cause: the public's right to know? Or did it serve another cause he thought warranted his taking it upon himself the authority to knowingly publish top secret classified information?

I'd love to hear Keller, Kristol and Gonzales debate this point. Kristol's actions in knowingly publishing classified information in the midst of a war speak for themselves, and his casual suggestion that the NYT should be prosecuted for doing the same does not seem consistent with his own practices.

More here.

Posted by Laura at June 25, 2006 02:35 PM