The New York Times again commits de facto TREASON. The Bush Administration needs to face the wrath of a Democratic Media that hates it anyway & arrest Sulzberger & Keller for TREASON.

Their complete disregard for our troops and our national security is apparent from this article at Breitbart:

Media Refuses to Hold Surveillance Story
Jun 23 12:23 AM US/Eastern

By JUSTIN BACHMAN
AP Business Writer

The Bush administration and The New York Times are again at odds over national security, this time with new reports of a broad government effort to track global financial transfers.

The newspaper, which in December broke news of an effort by the National Security Agency to monitor Americans’ telephone calls and e- mails, declined a White House request not to publish a story about the government’s inspection of monies flowing in and out of the country.

The Los Angeles Times also reported on the issue Thursday night on its Web site, against the Bush administration’s wishes. The Wall Street Journal said it received no request to hold its report of the surveillance.

Administration officials were concerned that news reports of the program would diminish its effectiveness and could harm overall national security.

“It’s a tough call; it was not a decision made lightly,” said Doyle McManus, the Los Angeles Times’ Washington bureau chief. “The key issue here is whether the government has shown that there are adequate safeguards in these programs to give American citizens confidence that information that should remain private is being protected.”

Treasury Department officials spent 90 minutes Thursday meeting with the newspaper’s reporters, stressing the legality of the program and urging the paper to not publish a story on the program, McManus said in a telephone interview.

“They were quite vigorous, they were quite energetic. They made a very strong case,” he said.

In its story, The New York Times said it carefully weighed the administration’s arguments for withholding the information and gave them “the most serious and respectful consideration.”

“We remain convinced that the administration’s extraordinary access to this vast repository of international financial data, however carefully targeted use it may be, is a matter of public interest,” said Bill Keller, the Times’ executive editor….

UPDATE (6:53 pm): Michelle Malkin nails it with this article — ‘BACKLASH AGAINST THE BLABBERMOUTHS’. She is compiling a list of angry letters to the New York Times and Los Angeles Times, the two papers that decided their hubris was worth more than our country. And she notes the growing influence of the Blogosphere:

They can buy ink by the barrel, but we can fight back now with bandwidth by the terrabyte.

Go read her article and write your own angry letter.

The key word in this next article is — “Congress”. Without a Republican House, America would have to surrender to Muslim Terrorists & grant Amnesty for illegals. If Democrats gain control their Marxists will march toward a Soviet Amerika. From the New York Post:

CONGRESS AGAIN VOTES FOR VICTORY
by John Podhoretz

June 23, 2006 — AT crucial moments over the past three-plus years, American politicians and American voters have been forced to pass judgment on the war in Iraq – not by pollsters asking a tiny fraction of them how they feel, but through actual votes, either in Congress or at the ballot box. And every time they are asked to pass judgment, they have chosen to wage it, to validate the politicians who supported it, to pay for it and to continue it.

That’s what happened yesterday in the Senate. Two proposals sponsored by Democratic politicians – one requiring the outright removal of U.S. forces by next year, the other putting the Senate on record as calling for a significant drawdown of U.S. forces from Iraq – went down to ignominious defeat. Both were landslide losses – 86-13 for the outright pullout, 60-39 for the big drawdown.

This follows similar votes last week in the Senate and the House of Representatives – not to mention votes cast on a fairly regular basis in both bodies since October 2002….

This all tells us something very valuable. Polls may say the war is wrong and was a mistake. But politicians, whose careers live and die not by polls but by actual votes cast in elections, are clearly being guided by a different understanding of what the people who do their democratic duty on Election Day truly believe.

Americans want to win this war. And when push comes to shove, the officials they elect are nowhere near ready to try and pull the plug.

There will be another referendum in November. If that goes very badly for Republicans, maybe Democrats will try again. But for now, Congress has spoken, and spoken loudly, in favor of seeking victory rather than retreat.