The New York Times' reckless disregard for national security

The Times' publication of a highly classified anti-terrorist financial tracking program does not serve a public interest, as their Executive Editor claims. By all accounts, and by relevant Supreme Court precedent, this program (like the NSA wiretapping program) is completely legal and well within the bounds of constitutionality. This revelation by the Times can only be seen in its proper light: a continued attempt to undermine anything done by the Bush Administration in their ongoing war to challenge its legitimacy. Yes, there are those who still believe that Bush "stole the election" in 2000. (Those people should actually go read the relevant Supreme Court decision in Bush v Gore.)

Tracking financial information as the administration has been doing is an essential part of the ongoing (but completely misnamed) war on terror. The lifeblood of terrorist activity is money, but the Times couldn't be swayed to protect American interests and NOT publish this program due to its obvious bias against President Bush. Let's be real here. Had this program been implemented by a "President Gore", would we be having this conversation? Of course not. Anyone who suggests otherwise would probably have swampland to sell you in Florida. Wait, isn't Jeb Bush governor of Florida? I smell a swampland conspiracy!

By revealing the completely constitutional NSA wiretapping program of suspected al-Qaeda operatives and now this ongoing program to track terrorist financial activity, the Times chose to engage in what many (myself included) believe to be treason. No, it's not a pretty word to throw around. But there can be no reasonable doubt that the exposure of this program has served to do two things: compromise the safety of every American (Republican and Democrat alike); provide aid and comfort to the enemy. We must not stand for this.
We're at war against a vicious and brutal enemy that doesn't adhere to the accepted international rules of war and the Geneva Convention. Those who would like to now present evidence of OUR violations of the Geneva Convention should stand forward and provide legitimate, real evidence. Please don't give me the tired "Abu Ghraib" or "Haditha" nonsense. We punished the few deviants for their misconduct at Abu Ghraib and the Haditha investigation is ongoing, despite Congressman Murtha's declaration of guilt of the servicemen and women involved. We should all be careful to remember that our nation's finest are entitled to all the protections of the Constitution that civilians are granted: innocence until guilt is proven beyond reasonable doubt; due process; etc.

The free press was protected in the Bill of Rights to allow newspapers to serve as the guardians and defenders of the public interest, to expose waste, fraud and abuse by the government. The New York Times has chosen to declare itself irrelevant as a guardian of the public interest by exposing this latest effort by the Bush Administration to protect American national security. How can public interest be served by taking the tools to prosecute a war out of the hands of the Commander in Chief? Like or dislike President Bush, he is still responsible for leading our effort to defeat this attempt at worldwide domination by radical Islam (sorry if that phrase makes people uncomfortable, but I don't drink the PC punch). The public deserves better. It is my hope that Attorney General Gonzales immediately begins proceedings to charge the New York Times and its editorial staff with crimes against the United States of America, not limited to, but hopefully including, treason.