RSS
（图片来源： PTG, 2006 NYT blabbermouths photoshop contest 2006）
Last week, it was the Washington Post spilling the beans on the nation’s post-9/11 top-secret infrastructure.
Today, it’s the 纽约时报 dutifully splashing vengeful Wikileaks’ massive document dump on our Afghanistan military strategy.
The Times tries not to break its collective arm patting itself on the back for its valiant struggle to publish the documents. As if it could resist.
Remember: From September 11, 2001 to the present, the terror-tipping blabbermouths of the New York Times have 多次破坏国家安全 披露有关许多关键反恐计划的敏感/机密信息。 该报已告上法庭，迫使政府公布此类信息。 论文已经表明 鲁ck无视 等加工。为 后果 的披露。
The only time it has shown any restraint is when disclosure would endanger one of its own reporters.
The Fishwrap of Record: Our enemies’ favorite rag.
Commenter corkie quotes from the NYTimes’ disclaimer:
Information that is marked “secret” has been determined to be information or material that the unauthorized disclosure of which reasonably could be expected to cause “serious damage” to the national security.
So the New York Times is freely admitting that they don’t concern themselves with risking 严重损害 对国家安全。
事实 Free Introduction information wasn’t marked Top Secret allows the Times to pretend that they wouldn’t have published material that has been determined to cause “exceptionally grave damage” to the national security. It’s nice to see that they deny contributing to exceptionally grave damage while being complicit in contributing to 严重损害.
Flashback: From our 2006 Blabbermouth NYTimes photoshop contest （更多的 相关信息）...
医管局附属机构 Sanctuary 布莱恩：
约翰·麦克：
精华液:
博客:
沙多士 （帽子提示 –
受影响的智慧真理):
理查德·普西罗：
乔治拉顿：
以前：
