Selective Outrage

By Anthony | July 8th, 2006 | 10:14 pm

Glenn Greenwald points out an interesting question asked by John Amato:

[W]hy are all of the Bush supporters celebrating the unauthorized leak to the Daily News of the FBI’s arrests of alleged terrorists who were talking in Internet chat rooms about blowing up the Holland Tunnel (later news reports indicated that the plot was really aimed at the PATH commuter train)?

Greenwald notes all the outrage from the right over the recent leaks published by the New York Times, and contrasts that reaction with the cheers greeting this new story. Of course, the difference is that the New York Times stories reflected poorly on Bush, while the Daily News piece makes it look as though the administration is getting the job done. However, according to the FBI, this leak was not without harm to our interests:

Authorities said they hadn’t intended to release details about the plot this early and that whoever leaked the information had compromised the FBI’s relationship with some foreign intelligence services.

The person who leaked the details is “clearly someone who doesn’t understand the fragility of international relations,” Mershon said.

2 Responses to “Selective Outrage”

  1. Sam W Says:

    Were happy they were caught, not about the leak. Rest assured, I am very very irritated with the Times for constantly printing information that may damage our national security.

  2. PotatoStew Says:

    I realize you’re irritated by the Times, but what about the Daily News for leaking this story about the bomb plot? Should they be charged with treason, as you said the Times and the Post should be?

    While we’re on the subject, do you still feel that the Washington Post should be charged with treason even though our government said that their story about Rumsfeld and Cheney’s homes presented no security risk, the information was already in the public domain, and the photographer had permission to take the photos used in the article?